Here are my favorite photos so far of Barack's trip.
Barack Obama surveys Baghdad with General David Petraeus
Barack Obama and Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai enjoyed a traditional lunch of mutton, chicken and rice washed down with a yogurt drink.
Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama greets U.S. troops at Camp Arifjan, the main U.S. military base in Kuwait. He stopped there Friday en route to Afghanistan.
Favorite Video - Kuwait - Obama Hoops with Troops
(Click on photo to link to video)
Sen. Barack Obama, left, with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, during a meeting in the West bank city of Ramallah, 23 Jul 2008
Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) meets Israel's President Shimon Peres (not pictured) in Jerusalem July 23, 2008.
Obama calls Israel a "miracle," vows staunch support
US Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) (2nd L) meets Israel's President Shimon Peres (2nd R) in Jerusalem July 23, 2008.
Holocaust flame … Barack Obama, wearing a white yarmulke, lays a wreath at the Holocaust museum, where ashes from concentration camps are buried. Photo: AFP
Obama wipes his forehead at a Montana campaign event in May.
McCain's handlers think they were owned. Photo-analysis suggests that Barack Obama may have been play-acting when he pulled out a hanky and patted his forehead at a campaign appearance in Montana two months ago. And the two lost months may cost McCain the election if the candidate, who is known for his volcanic temper, has a Nixonian moment of perspiration during the Presidential debates this Fall.
It's all part of a game of hot potato that the two camps have been playing, trying to stay cool under the constant glare of media scrutiny. Until today McCain's people believed they were going to win because Obama had fallen for the Republican's challenge to visit Baghdad, where the average high this month is 115 degrees. But then the news reported: "No sweat."
The confirmation was contained in today's AP story about Obama's suspicously frequent workouts, in which photo-journalists were quoted as saying that:
"even when he shot hoops earlier this year with members of the University of North Carolina varsity men's basketball team, they didn't see Obama sweat."
The report has the McCain campaign in a panic, for what was suspected and feared is now confirmed: Obama is cool, literally as well as figuratively. It's not just that he made the cover of Rolling Stone, GQ and Vibe. They knew McCain didn't stand a chance going one-on-one against Obama for the Metromale vote. That was a given. But it's the image of McCain as a sweaty old guy who turns off Hillary Clinton's women voters they were counting on to win that has them worried.
Sources who did not want to be identified because they are not authorized to discuss the sensitive subject confirm that a hush-hush project code-named "Operation Bikram" has been launched from an inconspicuous office at Republican National Committee headquarters. GOP operatives are simultaneously scouring the aisles of drug stores nationwide to find the most effective anti-perspirant and reviewing comparison tests of moisture wicking underwear. Separately a top-secret team of technicians, specialists in heating and cooling, is ready to move in and take over any debate venue that registers above 65 degrees.
These precautions are all intended to manage McCain's known tendency to get hot under the collar at the slightest provocation. And when really provoked McCain is known to breathe fire and sweat bullets. "It's hard to get John to cool off after one of these incidents," says an old family friend. "But that's why he has been so happy with Cindy, becuase he knows that at the end of the day he'll go home to an ice-cold Bud."
wizinit is the nom de guerre of a veteran diplomat and fan of the late columnist Art Buchwald who writes serious analysis and political satire. If you would like to be notified whenever wizinit posts a new article click on the logo to join Food Tasters For Obama.
Barack Obama’s first trip to Europe as the “presumptive” Democratic nominee will consist of stops in Great Britain, France and Germany.Only one public speech is planned on July 24 in Berlin.The exact location is not yet announced.But psericks has provided fascinating political, historical and even architectural details about the Brandenburger Tor and other possible venues.
Obama’s campaign has proven itself as masterful (if you forgive the faux blue Presidential seal and treatment of ladies in head scarves) at choreographing the backdrop for his speeches as he is in delivering them.Berlin should be no exception.It is a thriving pan-European cultural center 63 years after WWII and two short decades since German unification.And it is full of people who, like a majority of Germans, are wildly enthusiastic about Obama.Europeans generally appear to hope Obama will be the anti-Bush, sent to heal America’s heart and soul.So at whatever place Obama eventually speaks, there should be an enthusiastic throng and prospects for a great “photo op.”
Of course, photo ops can be tricky (see insert for a personal recollection of Jimmy Carter’s missing Caracas photo op).And truly meaningful and lasting memories, like the words and visuals of the Kennedy and Reagan visits, require an almost divine alignment of man, space and time.It is not certain that all these constellations are yet in proper orbit for Obama’s visit, however.For one thing, he will actually be speaking to two important but very different audiences.
Quest For The Perfect Photo Op
President Jimmy Carter visited Caracas, Venezuela in March 1978.I only vaguely recall the event even though I was personally there.It was supposed to be the start of an important visit to Latin America in the wake of the Panama Canal Treaty having been signed, ushering in a new era of US-Latin American relations.However, from my vantage point as a very junior officer serving at U.S. Embassy Caracas, it was not particularly eventful.And while the embassy’s senior staff jostled for “face time” with the President, I was assigned minor logistical duties.
I do clearly recall though that the White House advance team was obsessed about finding the perfect photo op.There were rumors it might appear in or maybe even make the cover of Time magazine.They decided to go for a still shot of Carter and Carlos Andres Perez (CAP), at the time riding high at the peak of Venezuela’s oil boom, walking through the colorful gardens at La Casona, the presidential mansion.I’ve searched, but could not find such a photo through Google.
There is, however, a small picture of the airport arrival ceremony in Google images and The American Presidency Project’s transcript of both presidents’ remarks.Reading the remarks today evokes pathos.For less than a year later, Ayatollah Khomeini would return to Iran, another OPEC country, to lead the revolution that would ultimately cause Carter’s downfall.And in his second term 15 years later, CAP would be forced from of office on corruption charges after surviving a military coup in 1992 by a young lieutenant colonel named Hugo Chavez.
The online transcript of the ceremony says that Carter delivered his speech at Simon Bolivar airport in Maiquetia in Spanish.If he did, I missed it.I was too busy behind-the-scenes making sure the President’s entourage boarded the cars waiting on the tarmac to whisk them all to Caracas.
First and most important is the audience that will not even be there: the American people.They, of course, will elect the next President.In a normally slow summer news cycle, Obama’s current world tour -- which also includes stops in Israel, Jordan, Iraq and Afghanistan -- will be closely watched here at home.However since the US media cannot be relied on to accurately report this trip, the Berlin speech is probably the most important opportunity between the last primary in early June and the Denver convention in late August for Obama to speak directly to American voters.
The other audience will include the people at the speech itself, as well as millions of other Europeans who are watching our presidential election with awe and expectation.For reasons related to their education, media focus and historic reliance on America, this audience is extremely well-informed about our politics.In fact, the average European may be as well or better informed about our national politics as the average American.But after the 2000 and 2004 elections, many Europeans have lost confidence in our ability to conduct elections and in our capacity to make a rational decision about who will lead us.
As much as Americans and Europeans have in common, and there are many ties that remain strong, these two audiences will assess Barack Obama’s performance in Berlin with different concerns and sometimes contradictory perspectives.Americans need to get to know Obama even if they don’t want to.Europeans want to get to know him even if they don’t need to.
Americans face this summer preoccupied by immediate economic problems here at home: the rising cost of gas and food, loss of jobs, home foreclosures and failing financial institutions.As Europeans head out on their traditional extended summer holidays they worry that America’s economic meltdown is dragging down their own banks and jeopardizing their unprecedented standard of living.
America worries about how it can safely extricate its troops from Iraq and restore the rule of law undermined after 9/11.Europe worries that it will be pressured to step up its commitment of forces in Afghanistan.And many Europeans wonder if the next Administration will be prepared to prosecute US officials responsible for violating international laws, conducting renditions, maintaining secret prisons and practicing torture.
America is struggling to assimilate the latest wave in a long history of immigration.Europe is wondering if its current immigrant population explosion is a threat to its religious and cultural identity, like the Ottoman conquest that was blocked somer 300 years ago.
Americans were united geographically following the Civil War, but national partisan divisions based largely on “values” and ideology now stymie government’s ability to provide for the public weal.European countries have for the first time achieved a semblance of transnational unity based on voluntary association, but they now struggle with how to proceed with institutional and policy harmonization.
When Barack Obama speaks in Berlin, he will be simultaneously addressing these disparate and sometime conflicting realities.His greatest challenge will not be adapting his style, but accommodating the substance of his oratory.For trying to satisfy one audience may not please the other.The challenge calls for an artful and nuanced construction of both words and ideas.We know that Obama is capable of meeting that challenge, but it will help considerably to have a great speechwriter who can provide the quotes to go along with the visuals.
wizinit is the nom de guerre of a veteran diplomat and fan of the late columnist Art Buchwald who writes serious analysis and political satire. If you would like to be notified whenever wizinit posts a new article click on the logo to join Food Tasters For Obama.
I was not too long ago when McCain was strongly advocating for the immediate withdrawal of American troops from America's interventions in Somalia and Haiti. Compared to his rhetoric about Democrats wanting to "wave the white flag of surrender" in Iraq, think on this McCain quote from 1994 when he was advocating the immediate withdrawal of US forces from Haiti:
['As soon as possible'] does not mean 'As soon as order is restored to Haiti'.
It doesn't mean 'As soon as democracy is flourishing in Haiti'.
It doesn't mean 'As soon as we have established a viable nation in Haiti'.
'As soon as possible' means 'As soon as we can get out of Haiti without losing any American lives'.
Pretty stark difference, eh?
I guess his stance on "waving the white flag of surrender" depends on which constituency he is trying to appease at the time; i.e., the Republican Senate in the 90s and the Republican Base now.
In the wake of former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan's new book describing in detail the lies, distortions and propaganda used by the White House to pressure, intimidate and cajole Congress and the American people into approving his invasion of Iraq, lest us not forget that Barack Obama was right on the Iraq war from Day One, while John McCain and Hillary Clinton let themselves be walked down the yellow brick road to the morass we find ourselves in today.
"But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors...and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history."
"I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences."
"I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda."
"I don't oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne."
"What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income, to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression."
"That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics."
"I think you'll be able to imagine many things Senator McCain will be able to say," she [Clinton] said. "He’s never been the president, but he will put forth his lifetime of experience. I will put forth my lifetime of experience. Senator Obama will put forth a speech he made in 2002."
The question I've been asking myself is a simple one: how many Democratic primary voters have actually read Obama's 2002 Iraq speech in full? Have you, kind reader, read his speech in full? Have you passed on the full text of his speech to others? Have you printed it out and passed it along? In this diary I present a flashback to Obama's Iraq speech from 2002, and dissect his speech into parts to see how his campaign philosophy and platform can be traced to his 926 words from October 2, 2002. If you haven't read Obama's Iraq war speech before, or haven't read it recently, please take two minutes and read it now (below).
Ok, so we've made it through the 19th debate. A rehashing of the same old questions, admittedly offering Sen. Obama the opportunity to provide substantially more detail on his policies. It was great viewing.
At least tonight we didn't have to hear Hillary Clinton say "If I knew then what I know now" in response to Sen. Obama's once again calling her out for her vote authhorizing the President to invade Iraq.
But my question is, when are we going to have an honest discussion about the true motivation behind the US invasion and subsequent demonizing of Iran? Am I the only one out here who is sensing the consequences of the war are even more grave than Obama suggested tonight?
For starters, I'd like Obama to discuss with the American people how Sadaam's 2000 decision to trade oil in euros and not petrodolars influenced US military intervention. I'd like some 'straight talk' about the seemingly imminent crisis we face as the future of the $ is even more seriously threatened by Iran's successful launch yesterday of its oil bourse .
Why aren't we discussing these issues? While we're at it, is the US involved in the severing of the underseas cables in the Persian Gulf region to prevent transactions from occuring between Iran and Europe?
In November 2000, Iraq became the first OPEC nation to begin selling its oil for Euros. Since then, the value of the Euro has increased 17%, and the dollar has begun to decline. One important reason for the invasion and installation of a U.S. dominated government in Iraq was to force the country back to the dollar. Another reason for the invasion is to dissuade further OPEC momentum toward the Euro, especially from Iran- the second largest OPEC producer, who was actively discussing a switch to Euros for its oil exports.
The upcoming war in Iraq war is mostly about how the CIA, the Federal Reserve and the Bush/Cheney administration view hydrocarbons at the geo-strategic level, and the unspoken but overarching macroeconomic threats to the U.S. dollar from the euro. The Real Reasons for this upcoming war is this administration's goal of preventing further OPEC momentum towards the euro as an oil transaction currency standard, and to secure control of Iraq's oil before the onset of Peak Oil (predicted to occur around 2010). However, in order to pre-empt OPEC, they need to gain geo-strategic control of Iraq along with its 2nd largest proven oil reserves. This essay will discuss the macroeconomics of the `petrodollar' and the unpublicized but real threat to U.S. economic hegemony from the euro as an alternative oil transaction currency.
Just yesterday, UPI announced that Iran has at last successfully launched its long awaited oil bourse.
TEHRAN, Feb. 20 (UPI) -- Iran has launched an oil exchange in the Persian Gulf economic free zone island of Kish.
The exchange is based on world oil exchanges. It has been planned for years but faced repeated delays, the Malaysia Sun reported.
Iranian Oil Minister Gholamhossein Nozari said oil trading would make Iran more competent as a supplier and ready to begin the supply of crude oil in the long term.
When plans were first announced, some analysts speculated Iran might use it to undermine the U.S. dollar by pricing crude in euros or other currencies.
Oil and petrochemical products will be traded in Iranian rials, as well as all other hard currencies, the statement quoted Nozari as saying.
Iran's central bank was seeking to diversify Iran's reserves away from the dollar because of U.S. sanctions on the Islamic republic.
"...the three major undersea cables connecting the Middle East’s major banking centers to their Western, and Global, counterparts.
The significance to the severing of these cables is the Middle East Banking Centers being denied access to the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT), based in Brussels and which carries up to 12.7 million messages a day containing instructions on many of the International transfers of money between banks, lies in Saudi Arabia, or any other Middle East Nation, being unable to change their previously, before loss of communication, encoded currency instructions from being changed"
"On Sunday, the day Iran opened its first Oil burse, (one that doesn't plan to trade oil for dollars, but rather, euros)a report was released by the U.S. military and was carried on practically every newswire: It alleged that weapons caches in Iraq appear to have growing links to Iran. In addition, there are reports that five undersea cables used for electronic communications into and out of Iran have been cut over the last month or so. The cover story seems to be that these are random and coincidental occurrences."
Muckracker ties this into the 2008 election, referring to the conflicting world views of the two candidates (Im supposing McCain and Obama): One with an obsolete view of the world as "20th century military superpower, bent on complete dominance. An outdated, self-perpetuating idea that the United States is THE greatest country in all the world. Period. And no one will take that away."
The other candidate,however, has a more forward thinking perspective:
We are a great country among many great countries. The days of playing king of the hill are over. Yes, there are dangers in the world and we have every right to defend ourselves. But the future belongs to those countries that work multi-laterally, buying and selling goods, mutually beneficial relationships. The future belongs to those countries that allow science and innovation to flourish. And most importantly, the future belongs to those countries that allow and enable their own citizens to flourish. Only wars that are absolutely necessary should be waged. The world is bigger than fear. Which candidate understands that fighting terrorists is not a good enough reason for America to exist?
Undoubtedly, it would conventionally be considered a major political faux pas for Obama to openly discuss the 'depth' of the threat to the US economy ... but I'm starting to worry that the neocon agenda, shrouded as it has been in secret and false flag ops, is once again engaged in international maneuvering which will have dire effects on America.
I'm wishing we had a leader who could trust us with some truth.
Durbin suggested that the former president has been giving somewhat revisionist accounts on the way the Iraq war debate played out.
“It was not easy to be against that war back when we cast that vote in October of 2002,” Durbin said. “I was one of 23 who voted against the war. Barack was supportive — one of the few candidates speaking out strongly against it in Illinois.
“If President Clinton had opposed that war as strongly as Barack Obama at the time, it would have helped a lot of us who had voted against authorizing an invasion.”
Durbin, the majority whip, was reacting to comments the former president has made in several recent forums suggesting that Obama’s opposition to the Iraq war has not been as steadfast as he has suggested on the stump.
On December 21, the Huffington Post published an article by former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson entitled "The Real Hillary I Know - and the Unreal Obama". In the article, which promoted Hillary Clinton's candidacy, Wilson associated himself with Wes Clark and Dick Holbrooke as early opponents of the Iraq War. He also made denigrating comments about Senator Barack Obama.
One can only guess why Joe Wilson would write such a provocative article. And while they also back Hillary Clinton, why have Clark and Holbrooke not publicly distanced themselves from Joe's characterization of Obama?
The assassination of Benazir Bhutto and MSMs attempt to reframe next week's Iowa primaries to promote the candidates with proven 'experience' in foreign affairs is an ideal time to revisit Obama's Foreign Policy Advisor Samatha Power's August 3rd memo.
Power wrote the memo after Obama came under attack for his comments on the situation in Pakisan, advocating a position which would re-examine the efficacy of continued US support of Mushareff as Ismalic fundamentalists' power grab on the country's northwest borders with Afghanistan continued to gain momentum
The full memo is here, an excerpt below
Vision: American foreign policy is broken. It has been broken by people who supported the Iraq War, opposed talking to our adversaries, failed to finish the job with al Qaeda, and alienated the world with our belligerence. Yet conventional wisdom holds that people whose experience includes taking these positions are held up as examples of what America needs in times of trouble.
Barack Obama says we have to turn the page. We cannot afford any more of this kind of bankrupt conventional wisdom. He has laid out a foreign policy that is bold, clear, principled, and tailored for the 21st century. End a war we should never have fought, concentrate our resources against terrorists who threaten America. End the counter-productive policy of lumping together our adversaries and avoiding talking to our foes. End the era of politics that is all sound-bites and no substance, and offer the American people the change that they need.
The conventional US methods of interjecting ethically questionnable cohorts into the politics of countries on the Western elite's drawing board failed in Iraq (Chalabi) and fails once again in Pakistan.
Not much is being reported on Bhutto's checkered past, when just last month MSNBCs Richard Engel, Middle East bureau chief reported:
Bhutto is a flawed hero. She has been accused – she says for political reasons – of massive corruption while serving twice as prime minister, first in the late 1980s and later in the mid-1990s. Bhutto stands accused of stealing roughly $1.5 billion, mostly in the form of kickbacks on government contracts.
Common interests
Bhutto and Musharraf also have a common interest in keeping the courts here weak. Despite her rhetoric against the Pakistani president, it was Musharraf who helped to have Bhutto's corruption charges put on hold when he allowed her to return to Pakistan from exile last month.
While the Harvard- and Oxford-educated Bhutto is the leading opposition politician in Pakistan, she is still more popular in the West than at home. Bhutto’s regime is remembered for having one of the worst human rights records in Pakistan's history, and her government did not allow the media freedoms she criticizes Musharraf for crushing.
Bhutto could also still face corruption cases in Britain, Spain and Switzerland.
Engel's report references another less than favorable NYTs article which reports:
"But her record in power, and the dance of veils she has deftly performed since her return – one moment standing up to General Musharraf, then next seeming to accommodate him, and never quite revealing her actual intentions – has stirred as much distrust as hope among Pakistanis,"
Some interesting tidbits ... a timeline ...
May 2006, Bhutto and Nawaz Shariff, both then exiled ex-premiers signed a "charter of democracy" "which rejects all constitutional amendments introduced after General Pervez Musharraf assumed power in bloodless coup on October 12, 1999.
October, 07. Conventional Washington wisdom backed the return of Bhutto to Pakistan in to broker a shared government deal with Mushareff. Despite the attempt on her life upon her arrival, the US registers no overt concern, leaving her security in the hands of Mushareff
November,Mushareff, reluctant to cooperate with Washington, flies to Saudi Arabia and agrees to allow exiled former PM Shariff to re-enter Pakistan in time to register for the Jan 8 election. From AsiaNews http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/?sid=302375
Interestingly, Saudi Arabia's ambassadors to the United States Adel A. Al-Jubeir and to Pakistan Ali Saeed Awadh Assiri were present in the meetings with the King Abdullah. The presence of the Saudi envoy to the US was important since it indicated that the US would also be on board in the ongoing interaction between Sharif and the authorities in Pakistan, sources added
November, Bhutto announces plans to partner with Sharif (overthrown in the 1999 coup by Musharraf) and demands Musharraf step down ...
December, on the same day as the Bhutto assassination, Bloomberg reports:
At least four supporters of Pakistan's former premier Nawaz Sharif were killed and another 12 wounded in the capital, Islamabad, when gunshots were fired on an election rally.
Where am I going with this? What does this have to do with Blackwater? I guess Im wondering if conventional washington thinking, souring on the idea of Bhutto, just opted out of ensuring her security .... and now sits back as chaos unfolds throughout Pakistan, just like we did in Iraq, before the US sent in Bremer to implement 'disaster democracy' using private mercenaries to protect its envoys.
No matter how you spin it, what the story really is, the Bhutto assassination is just another example of the failures of conventional US foreign policy.
HuffPo's Lionel Beehner has got it right: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lionel-beehner/us-options-for-a-postb_b_78461.html
The next leader of the free world needs to think more specifically and clearly about how best to use American influence to keep Pakistan from becoming the next Afghanistan or Sudan circa late-1990s. The first serious American politician to propose a radical realignment of U.S. policy toward Pakistan was Barack Obama. Last summer, he proposed unilateral military action if the United States was supplied with "actionable intelligence" on Osama bin Laden's whereabouts in Pakistan. He was pounced on by the punditry, his statements taken as further evidence he is a foreign policy lightweight. How dare a presidential candidate jeopardize one of America's most prized partnerships and impinge Pakistani sovereignty! Or, even if Republicans might agree with Obama, it's best not to say such things in public, pundits said.
Now, fast-forward a few months--after a state of martial law, the most deadly terrorist attack in Pakistani history, and the assassination of the country's top opposition figure--most Americans would probably agree that Washington's backing of Musharraf makes for bad policy. Even Republicans like Mike Huckabee have echoed Obama's sentiments to take out terrorist camps in Pakistan without Islamabad's permission.
Problem is, we don't have the time we had back then for everyone else to catch up with Obama's new vision ... .... !!!
I'm in Washington, Iowa, southwest of Muscatine, where we are opening a new Obama office to cover Washington and Louisa (pronounced Lu-eye-sah) counties. And this message is being transmitted via free WiFi at the friendly Dodici's coffee shop because we are waiting to have phones and internet installed sometime today.
In addition to making a few calls two nights ago, my work in Washington has been related mostly to the office start-up: scraping the ice off the sidewalk, putting up a coat rack, shelves, and Obama posters, picking up and organizing supplies. Most of all, though, I've enjoyed meeting the steady stream of supporters and volunteers who have stopped by, some to donate office equipment, but mostly to check out the office and/or pick up their coveted tickets to the Obama/Oprah event Saturday night in Cedar Rapids. They are great, enthusiastic Obama supporters who are proud to have the campaign's official presence in their area.
The United States should provide global leadership grounded in the understanding that the world shares a common security and common humanity. We must lead not in the spirit of a patron, but the spirit of a partner. Extending an outstretched hand to others must ultimately be more than just a matter of expedience or even charity. It must be about recognizing the inherent equality, dignity, and worth of all people. It will require American leadership that leverages engagement and resources from our traditional allies in the G-8 as well as new actors, including emerging economies (e.g. India, China, Brazil and South Africa), the private sector and global philanthropy. Yet, while America and our friends and allies can help developing countries build more secure and prosperous societies, we much never forget that only the citizens of these nations can sustain them.
Barack Obama, “Strengthening Our Common Security by Investing in Our Common Humanity”, New Hampshire. November 2007.
Today's Center for Global Development blog has a wonderful posting on Obama's platform introduced last week at his Foreign Policy forum.
I post here the highlights of his position as laid out in this blog for reference.
Expand prosperity through investments in agriculture, infrastructure and economic growth so the benefits and burdens of globalization are shared equally and economic policy is seen as central to security policy;
Create an Add Value to Agriculture Initiative to promote a Green Revolution in Africa in addition to other measures to increase poor farmers' access to agricultural markets;
Establish a $2 billion Global Education Fund for primary education to help eliminate the “global education deficit”;
Launch a Global Energy and Environment Initiative, create an Emerging Market Energy Fund, and spur the creation of an open-source, real-time mapping system to forecast the impacts of climate change country-by-county to address climate change and other global environmental challenges;
Lead efforts to reform the International Monetary Fund and World Bank;
Develop a rapid response fund for societies in transition;
Invest in global health infrastructure, including creating health care systems that train and retain health care workers; and (last but not least)
Coordinate and consolidate the twenty-some U.S. agencies currently involved in U.S. foreign assistance (including the Millennium Challenge Account and the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief) in a restructured and empowered U.S. Agency for International Development.
This extraordinary example of Obama's 'out-of-the-box" evolved perceptions about recreating the role the US plays in the globalized world fell through the veritable cracks in MSM coverage, as did,for the most part, the magnfiicent forum itself.
Let's take a look at some global 'hot spots' and apply Obama-ology to them.
For starters, lets consider a few issues which are considered off limits or too hot to handle in today's political discourse:
the plans reportedly underway to create a North American Union & a superhighway stretching from Mexico to Canada. Nobody touches this because it calls into question the right wing's blatant attempt to mandate immigration as the key issue in the 08 election ... Q. If we're going to join the three countries, then why is immigratin an issue? A. It isn't. The admin has no plans to stem immigration.
Obama:Expand prosperity through investments in agriculture, infrastructure and economic growth so the benefits and burdens of globalization are shared equally and economic policy is seen as central to security policy;
the plan to establish permanent US bases in Iraq as part of our plan to reshape the Middle East.
Obama: Coordinate and consolidate the twenty-some U.S. agencies currently involved in U.S. foreign assistance (including the Millennium Challenge Account and the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief) in a restructured and empowered U.S. Agency for International Development.
the discovery of a huge lake under Sudan with sufficient water to address the drought which necessitated the migration of northern sudanese tribes southward and directly impacted the outbreak of violence in Darfur. Q. What happened to this lake? Has it already been privitized? (And what about the flooding this year in Uganda and the tyhpoon in Bangladesh?)
Obama: Launch a Global Energy and Environment Initiative, create an Emerging Market Energy Fund, and spur the creation of an open-source, real-time mapping system to forecast the impacts of climate change country-by-county to address climate change and other global environmental challenges;
the Israel/Pakistan situation: The admin. presents an Annapolis Summit while Abbas Fata police force gathers en masse to quell riots in the street opposing the authority of Abbas to represent Palestininan interests.
Obama: Develop a rapid response fund for societies in transition;
Obama: Coordinate and consolidate the twenty-some U.S. agencies currently involved in U.S. foreign assistance (including the Millennium Challenge Account and the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief) in a restructured and empowered U.S. Agency for International Development.
All things Africa, most notably Somalia, where US backed Ehtiiopian troops battle with LRA; Nigeria, where MEND is waging guerrila war with imbedded transnational oil companies, the Congo, where transnationals continue to drill, mine, and destroy natural resources, arm resident armies and displace millions, and of course again, Sudan
Obama: Create an Add Value to Agriculture Initiative to promote a Green Revolution in Africa in addition to other measures to increase poor farmers' access to agricultural markets;
Obama: Establish a $2 billion Global Education Fund for primary education to help eliminate the “global education deficit”;
Obama: Lead efforts to reform the International Monetary Fund and World Bank;
Obama: Develop a rapid response fund for societies in transition;
Obama:invest in global health infrastructure, including creating health care systems that train and retain health care workers; and (last but not least)
Obama: Coordinate and consolidate the twenty-some U.S. agencies currently involved in U.S. foreign assistance (including the Millennium Challenge Account and the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief) in a restructured and empowered U.S. Agency for International Development.
Meanwhile, the Republicans fisticuff over Mitt's yard crew and Hillary harps on Obama's Kindergarten essay.
Why hasn't any other presidential candidate come up with such profoundly universally-relevant proposals? IMHO, this has everything to do with spending your formative years growing up in a distinctively un-American culture, coming from a family where some of your siblings and father reside in Kenya, and coupling financial aide with an innate intelligence to attend the finest American universities.
Obama is the essence of the American Dream. It is the the extensiveness and cohesion of his world view which affords him the unique ability to imagine an America big enough to export the dream in the process of restoring it.
This is a fairly tangential diary with respect to Barack Obama, but concerns some continuing dramatic distinctions between the two Democratic frontrunners, crossposted at DailyKos
Or, as an alternative title: "Mixed Messages"
We begin in December of 2003, when Senator Clinton was still speaking of Iraq in the following manner:
I was one who supported giving President Bush the authority, if necessary, to use force against Saddam Hussein. I believe that that was the right vote. I have had many disputes and disagreements with the administration over how that authority has been used, but I stand by the vote to provide the authority because I think it was a necessary step in order to maximize the outcome that did occur in the Security Council with the unanimous vote to send in inspectors. And I also knew that our military forces would be successful. But what we did not appreciate fully and what the administration was unprepared for was what would happen the day after.
If you had the misfortune of watching Fox News Sunday, you saw Bill Kristol and a few others get bent out of shape about the refusal of some Foreign Service Officers (FSOs) to be posted to Baghdad. While it seems like a pretty minor argument, given the current state of affairs, the Fauxs on Fox were "outraged." In fact, one of the heads made this observation (I'm 90% certain it was Brit Hume but I don't have a transcript):
Iraq is the most important diplomatic posting in the world.
This statement received no challenge from any of the other guests, although no reasonable person familiar with the State Department, or diplomacy at all, would have even thought to utter it. This statement embodies why the conservative conventional wisdom on diplomacy continues to be dangerously wrong. That logic train, and the rails it flies off of, below the fold.
Barack Obama's proposed diplomatic approach to Iran was headline news in the NY Times and MSNBC news programming today. It is marked particularly by a proposed pledge to abandon a policy of regime change in exchange for Iranian cooperation in Iraq and on nuclear proliferation.
The ideology-driven Bush Administration squandered its early opportunities and openings for diplomacy with Teheran. Its subsequent strategic blunders in Iraq and the broader Middle East have greatly reduced Iran's incentives for accommodation with the U.S.
It is impossible to gauge the eventual reaction from the Iranian political leadership to Obama's openings. But confrontation is not inevitable and there is far less to lose through diplomacy than can be gained through belligerence by either the US or Iran.
It may not be a question of "is it too late?" for diplomacy, but rather whether it is too early.
Today, I turn to a couple of other myths: that a vote for Kyl-Lieberman was a vote for diplomacy, and that her co-sponsorship of the Webb amendment (which would prohibit expenditures for an attack on Iran) effectively balances out her vote for Kyl-Lieberman.
Incredibly, there is still a great deal of misconception and mytyhology being spun about legislation dealing with Iran. Senator Hillary Clinton's Presidential campaign has spun many of them. Specifically, these myths are:
1) Kyl-Lieberman was substantially the same bill as S.970, which was co-sponsored by Chris Dodd and Barack Obama;
2) That Kyl-Lieberman encouraged diplomacy instead of war-mongering.
3) That Senator Clinton's co-sponsorship of Webb's Iran amendment somehow balances out her vote for Kyl-Lieberman.
The record shows that Kyl-Lieberman is not only about bombing Iran, but keeping US forces in Iraq.
Below the fold I will debunk Myth #1. Tomorrow I will turn to Myths #2 and #3.
(wizinit raises some really good questions... We also always love reports from the field! - promoted by psericks)
It was easily as rainy in Hanover NH today as it was in Manchester on May 19 during the first canvass for Barack Obama. And this time we didn't have hundreds of other volunteers with whom to share the "misery".
Three hours of rain almost shredded our voter lists. But Dana and I, joined by Bill from Woodstock VT, dutifully knocked on doors and people appeared somewhat more decided about how they planned to vote in the primary than in my past canvasses. There was a Republican woman who planned to vote for Richardson and a Democrat who supported Edwards, but it sounded like Obama was a strong alternative if their candidates floundered.
Anything can happen, but as I described in "The Psychology of Primary Politics - The Marginal Utility of Second Choice" (see http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/markwiznitzer/CJCX), being the fall-back choice in the current race could turn out well for Obama.
Before heading home, we returned to the Lebanon office, where we turned in two signed supporter cards and a couple of requests for lawn signs. Pretty good results considering few people were home on this rainy Saturday afternoon.
As I reflected on the day's experience, however, an eerie thought crept into my mind. Only one voter had mentioned the war in Iraq to me, and no one had brought up Iran, even though that had been the most important foreign policy issue in the news this past week.
Barack Obama surveys Baghdad with General David Petraeus
Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama greets U.S. troops at Camp Arifjan, the main U.S. military base in Kuwait. He stopped there Friday en route to Afghanistan.
Obama wipes his forehead at a Montana campaign event in May. 
The report has the McCain campaign in a panic, for what was suspected and feared is now confirmed: Obama is cool, literally as well as figuratively. It's not just that he made the cover of Rolling Stone, GQ and Vibe. They knew McCain didn't stand a chance going one-on-one against Obama for the Metromale vote. That was a given. But it's the image of McCain as a sweaty old guy who turns off Hillary Clinton's women voters they were counting on to win that has them worried. 
There is, however, a small picture of the airport arrival ceremony in Google images and The American Presidency Project’s 
