For the President's urgent decision ...
Suppose you were President of the United States of America. You walked into the Oval Office this morning, and here's what you found in your in-tray, marked "For the President's urgent decision":
1. Afghanistan: the election was a fiasco. President Karzai's credibility has vanished. General McChrystal wants more troops. Britain, France and Germany want an urgent international conference to decide what to do next. Yes or no?
2. Iran: their latest nuclear proposals add up to zilch, according to our guys. (The Russians take a different view, but they would, wouldn't they?) The New York Times says our intelligence agencies have concluded that Tehran has created enough nuclear fuel "to make a rapid, if risky, sprint for a nuclear weapon". The Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, seems to have been conducting some mysterious secret mission in Moscow, apparently connected somehow to Iran's nuclear programme. Mr President: you need to decide what to do.
3. Israel/Palestine: Everyone is waiting for you to unveil a dramatic new peace initiative. All we've got so far is the two sides agreeing to talk. Sir, it's not enough, and Mr Netanyahu is speeding up settlement building even as he hints he's ready for a "suspension" of new permits. We need something in time for the UN General Assembly in 10 days ... your thoughts, please.
4. Health care: your speech on Wednesday seems to have gone down well. But it wasn't enough, as you knew it wouldn't be. You still need to do more to get some of our own people on the Hill on side, and Senator Olivia Snowe (Republican, Maine) needs a touch more sweet-talking. We think you'll get something through, but we need to know how much further you're prepared to go to buy off the unconvinced. When will you abandon the "public option" idea of a government-funded health insurance scheme to run side by side with the private schemes?
I don't know about you, but if I were President, I think I'd find any one of these decisions daunting enough, let alone all of them together. But I guess no one runs for President thinking he's in for a quiet life.
So Barack Obama is where he is, and soon he'll be marking the first anniversary of his election as President. An increaasing number of American voters are asking what he's managed to achieve so far ... his economic stimulus package may have saved or created a million jobs, as the White House is claiming, but many more jobs have been lost.
Power and authority work in strange ways, so if the President gets it right on just one of the issues listed above, he'll then be more likely to make headway on the others. Success breeds success, just as failure breeds failure. Trouble is: where will the first success come from?
Mr Obama sometimes gave the impression during his campaign that just by electing him, American voters could make the world a better place. But a ballot paper is not a magic wand, and the world's problems didn't melt away as soon as Barack Obama won last November.
And remember the brutal US electoral calendar ... in November of next year, it'll be time for mid-term Congressional elections, which means there are already plenty of Democrats in Congress more anxious to do what they think will please their voters than to do what will please their President.
So, suppose you were President ... on issues 1 to 4 above, what would you do?
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~39~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Answers:
1. Afghanistan: Exit strategy required urgently - pull out as soon as possible as all the foreign troops are doing is supporting a corrupt regime and this is a no win situation. Get rid of Karzai and it will be meddling, don't get rid of him and the place is a failed state run by a corrupt dictator - so get out now. Perhaps offer to move to Pakistan's tribal areas BUT only on Pakistan's invitation otherwise come home!
2. Iran - do nothing as the internal divisions within the country make it impossible for anything to be effective. Perhaps suggest to Iran that they may consider helping sort out their neighbour, Afghanistan. Iranian elections are after all slightly/considerably less corrupt than Afghanistan's.
3. Israel/Palestine - switch economic (and military?) support to Palestine. As supporting Israel has failed as a policy to bring peace to the area. After all the USA has a long history of switching sides!
4. Health - design a national health care insurance policy and force all insurers to sell only this policy. The only good way through the US health care problem is to chase the money. Another way might be to change the accounting rules and disclosures required of the health care insurers such that it was to their advantage (profit) to sell less expensive policies to the uninsured. At the same time streamline hospital accounting to a national standard.
Or alternatively if these are too hard find something else that will distract the public for a while - a new puppy for the family, until the inevitable (apparently) double dip recession takes hold! It might also be an idea to actually introduce tighter regulations for the banks -- not just claim that it will happen - what happened to 'fail value' accounting - that should frighten the banks and get their attention.
Complain about this comment
You are only asking him to save the world. You left out climate change. Are you asking these things be addressed before or after lunch? Not problems that developed in a day or independently of other countires with other interest. Has your mind stopped working or just run out of any new ideas to discuss?
Complain about this comment
Frist I'd nuke Hendon. Then I'd go fishing. Nobody will miss Hendon. They won't even notice that it's gone.
Complain about this comment
On the health care reform issue which needs to be settled in a few months while Congress is still in session, several developments need to be considered:
1. The opposition to health care reform has raised a number of objections that are obviously fallacious but continue to be repeated
ad-infinitum such as charges of socialized medicine, plans for euthanizing old people, plans to end private insurance. Obama tried to refute these charges in his speech but the opposition is obviously stubbornly clinging to their beliefs about the legislation being drafted in Congress. Congressman Joe Wilson (R, SC) heckled the President in the middle of his speech claiming that the President was lying when he declared that there was a provision to ban help for illegal immigrants in his reform package.
2. The government insurance or a "public option" provision was still on the table according to Obama in his speech but the question remains whether he can get a filibuster proof super-majority of votes in the Senate to support such a provision. Though the Democrats have just enough votes in the Senate (including Bernie Sanders, independent of Vermont who votes with the Democrats on most issues), a number of Senators have said they oppose the "public option" including key Senators like chairman Max Baucus (D, MT) and Keith Conrad (D, ND) of the Finance Committee. Also Ben Nelson (D, NB) and Blanche Lincon (D, AR) have indicated they will not support the "public option."
3. Senator Olympia Snowe (R, ME) is in talks with the White House to change direct support for the "public option" to something called a "trigger" to the "public option." The idea appears to be to make the "public option" provisional to the private insurance industry bringing down the costs of health care according to some as yet unspecified criteria. This seems to be a rather tenuous kind of regulation to try to enforce but the White House may have no choice but to agree with Senator Snowe if it wants the bill to pass.
4. Liberal supporters of the "public option" and heretofore the staunchest supporters of Obama's presidency are threatening to vote agains the health care reform bill if the "public option" is removed from the bill. This could be the most severe test of the President's ability whether he can persuade this major part of the base of the Democratic party to back down and support his bill even though the "public option" is modified according to Senator Snowe's "trigger" provision.
Complain about this comment
After giving you the current scenario for the passage of President Obama's health care reform bill in Congress, I ran across a very insightful and erudite column by a well known professor of political science in New York from which I wish to share some excerpts. The professor has been a strong supporter of Barack Obama's presidential aspirations but has since become one of the disillusioned followers of Obama's dragging, drooping presidency. On the matter of how Obama has failed to inspire his devoted followers and (naively) failed to woo the vocal right wing opposition of the Republican party to join his bipartisan coalition, the professor has this to say. "Obama was complete fool if he ever believed for a moment that his kumbaya act was going to bring the right along behind him. These foamin-at-the-mouth lunatics have completely lost all sense and proportion, and were bound to viscerally hate any president left of Cheney, let alone some black guy in their White House. Meanwhile, centrist voters seem pretty much only to care about taxes and spending so he has lost them too. And he has blown off the solid progressive base [of his party] by spitting in their eyes at every imaginable opportunity, beginning with the formation of his cabinet [and] ranging through every policy decision from civil rights to civil liberties to foreign policy to healthcare and culminating with his choice not to even mobilize his email database in support of his policies." On how Obama has mishandled the legislative strategy for his healthcare reform. "Meanwhile he has also chosen to put healthcare reform on the table as the signature legislative initiative of his entire presidency. But watching him in action I wonder if this clown really wants a second term. If you had asked me in January how Obama could have bungled this program most thoroughly I would have written a prescription not much different from what we have witnessed over the last eight months. Don't frame the issue. Let the right backed by the greedy industry monsters do it [for you] on the worst possible terms for you. Don't fight back when they say the most outrageous things about your plan. Let Congress do it. Let the minority [Republican] party have an equal voice in the proceedings even if they won't vote for the bill under any circumstances. Have these savages negotiate with a small group of right-wing Democrats, all of them major recipients of industry campaign donations. Blow off your base completely. Cut secret sweetheart deals with the Big Pharamaceutical and Big Insurance corporate vampires. Wait until its almost too late to give a major speech on the issue. Set a timetable for action and then let it slip. Indicate what you want in the bill but then be completely unclear about whether you necessarily require those things. Go on vacation in the heat of battle." On the contrast between the perfect execution of the presidential campaign and the bumbling of his first year in office. "Now look at the guy who ran a letter-perfect disciplined textbook insurgent victorious campaign for the White House. Can they possibly be the same person. Since they obviously are is there possibly another explanation for this disaster? I dunno. But what I do know is this. Obama's very best-case scenario for healthcare legislation right now represents a ton of lost votes in 2010 and 2012. And the worst that scenario gets the worse he and his party do [as well]. But even a successful [passage of the bill] will produce a tepid bill, a mistrustful public, and inflamed and unanswered radical right and a [uninspiring] new government program that does not even to go online til 2013. A real vote-getter, no?" On foreign policy blunders by the Obama administration. "Obama is probably also sitting on several national security powder kegs. He is unlikely to close Guantanamo and he is unlikely to leave Iraq and he is unlikely to win in Afghanistan." On Obama's chances for a second term. "Put it all together and it is pretty hard to see how Obama gets a second term. Which means we're looking at a Romney or a Palin or some sort of similar monster as the next president, despite the fact that their party was absolutely loathed only a year ago and still are today. And that's a scary notion, since the [Republican] party voting base who will make that choice in 2012 is the same crowd you've seen featured all this summer at town hall meetings. Olympia Snowe is not going to be the Republican nominee in 2012. Know what I mean."
Complain about this comment
Re #3. As I have annoyed Maximus Cretinous (Americanus)and reduced him/her to dumb stupidity there must be at least some element of rationality, humanity and common sense in my previous contribution!
Complain about this comment
points 1-4: Phone Robin Lustig for advice!
MAII: 1. nuke, 2. nuke, 3. nuke, 4. nuke
What's the official Republican position on all four points?
Complain about this comment
"As I [John From Helldom] have annoyed Maximus Cretinous (Americanus)and reduced him/her to dumb stupidity (I'm beginning to feel British already) there must be at least some element of rationality, humanity and common sense in my previous contribution!"
John, I've looked for it countless times often putting your postings under a high power microscope. If it's there, I can't find it.
Complain about this comment
#8. MarcusAureliusII wrote:
"I've looked for it countless times often putting your postings under a high power microscope. If it's there, I can't find it."
MCA try putting yourself in someone-else's place and looking at the World from their point of view!
#7. _marko wrote: MCA (see #6) does not vote - no one is good enough for him/her! He/she sees even the neocons (or Genghis Kahn) as dangerously wishy-washy liberals. He/she is the Ford Edsel of rational thought.
Complain about this comment
"He/she sees even the neocons (or Genghis Kahn) as dangerously wishy-washy liberals"
That's right. If Kahn hadn't been so soft, Europe would have been a colony of Mongolia instead of China being a colony of Europe. If I'd been President of the United States on 9-11-01, twenty-four hours later the problem of the Taleban and al Qaeda would have been solved once and for all. If you want something done right in this world, you have to do it yourself. It's the lesson life teaches you.
Complain about this comment
#10. MarcusAureliusII (just look at it!)
You condemn yourself with your own pen. You believe only in death.
Complain about this comment
addendum to 11
Maximus Cretinous Americanus: see verse 32 from Chapter 11 of the Bhagavad Gita.
Complain about this comment
After careful consideration and nuanced analysis, the official Republican position and detailed counter arguments and proposals on all four points are:
1) Afghanistan: You can't trust Obama
2) Iran: Obama won't do the right thing
3) Israel/Palestine: the inexperience of Obama is dangerous
4) Health care: Obama is a liar
etc.
(please correct me if I'm wrong about the Republican position)
Complain about this comment
"You condemn yourself with your own pen. You believe only in death."
For terrorists like al Qaeda, the Taleban, the Farc.....and for Hendon.
"Maximus Cretinous Americanus: see verse 32 from Chapter 11 of the Bhagavad Gita."
Somewhere I have a copy of this ancient Hindu sex manual but frankly, being of scientific mind...I'd suggest one start with the Kinsey Report and work your way up.....to Hustler Magazine.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Minimus Amoebus Britanicus;
See the Preamble to the Constitution of the United States of America, the solemn oath the President swears to uphold upon assuming office, and the first ten amendments to the Constitution called the Bill of Rights. You will not see in it even one reference to international law, new world order, protecting Europe, giving aid to other nations, the UN, NATO, WTO, NAFTA, government bailouts of failed banks including big bonuses to their incompetent executives at taxpayer expense, socialized medicine, or recognition of Hendon. What you will see are references to the security of the United States and the right of people to assemble and protest by petitioning their government when they feel the President and Congress have not done their jobs well. Only time will tell if this is the beginning of the end for the community organizer/law journal editor who would be the most powerful man in the world. His enemies are like a mad pit bull with a rag doll in its mouth determined to rip it to shreds.
Complain about this comment
Having read Marcus Aurelius (the original), a stoic, your anger seems out of character. You and John of H need to stop meeting like this. Although the Kahn did not conquer all of Europe he did conquer some and ancestors blood runs in those veins today. China was once subject to limited English rule, through concessions, along with other nations, but of course England held exclusive rights to the opium trade, they are now all dependencies (financially) of China. Diplomacy from the barrel of a gun usually holds future consequences.
Complain about this comment
notaghostofachance
"China was once subject to limited English rule, through concessions, along with other nations, but of course England held exclusive rights to the opium trade..."
I don't think the Chinese see it that way. They were weak and occupied by foreign powers who exercised their will as total control enslaving their people by turning them into drug addicts. They were humiliated. They are the ones who are angry and probably secretly seeking revenge. (The US never colonized China and only played a minor role there during the 19th century.)
You confuse ridicule and contempt with anger. There is nothing for me to be angry about. How could there be? The world is exactly as it ought too be. Unlike those who expend their energies in sheer futility trying to change it, I accept it for what it is and try to make the best life I can in it. Of the two kinds of people in the world, that second kind strikes me as far happier and wealthier. The others just whine.
As for Hendon, like most Brits I think he has no sense of humor. Nope, none whatsoever.
Complain about this comment
#18. MarcusAureliusII wrote:
"As for Hendon, like most Brits I think he has no sense of humor. Nope, none whatsoever."
Maximus Cretinous Americanus: Genocide and death - are your only answer to everything - I am sorry but I do find these suitable subjects for humour. The humour I prefer is the debunking of pompous, arrogant, ignorant and selfish individuals!
Complain about this comment
MAII:
The United State marines had a couple of bases in China during that period and "protected" the concessions when two different attempts by the Chinese people to end the opium trade were made. Hardly passive, unless you don't consider the shooting of Chinese as anything that really counts, and funding the overthrow of the exisitng government. I'm not arguing that the government wasn't corrupt, but so is the American government today, so would the Chinese be justified in funding an overthrow to install a more friendly government?I guess you think that because China "was weak" that gave the right for Western governments to impose many unfair agreeements and abuse the Chinese people. Western minds full of cultural superiority, always trying to help the poor countries out...for a profit of course...bowl of rice if you would convert to become a Christian...., no, than strave to death. You may also wish to read about the history of the treatment of the Chinese in America, a very sad tale of great abuse.
Complain about this comment
JFH
"The humour I prefer is the debunking of pompous, arrogant, ignorant and selfish individuals!"
Now I understand completely...what keeps you in Britain. Missionary Work.
sichuan wok;
"so would the Chinese be justified in funding an overthrow to install a more friendly government?"
Somehow I have a sneaking suspicion they already did that. How else would you explain the US government standing by as tens of millions of jobs and so much American technology were sent to China?
"I guess you think that because China "was weak" that gave the right for Western governments to impose many unfair agreeements and abuse the Chinese people. Western minds full of cultural superiority, always trying to help the poor countries out...for a profit of course..."
Hmmm, seems to me that it's quite the other way around. China "helping poor countries out...for a profit of course" in Africa...and even America. We'll see just how much profit there is in that US Treasury debt when the US has 20% inflation a year and the dollar tumbles 60%.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS