Fake smoke doesn't mean there's a fire

My trying to ignore the blaring news of the day didn't last long. Today it's back to my rant against the sorry state of journalism: TV news is the worst (right-wing radio doesn't even count as news; it's entertainment), with newpapers next, and even the liberal blogosphere is beginning to slip.

The latest example of that is a headline on Huffington Post: "Obama tainted by Blagojevich scandal." In fact, from the article itself, the headline should have read "Obama had no connection with the Blagojevich scandal." When even liberal voices feel the need to sensationalize, we're in deep trouble.

Last night, I was eating dinner in a cafe where I couldn’t avoid the TV screen, with Wolf Blitzer doing the news. This was CNN — not FOX News — but they couldn’t stop speculating about the motives behind all this. “What’s Firzgerald up to, asking Obama to delay releasing his internal review?" But they went on and on about how this delay will be to Obama's advantage because it allows them to release the review on Christmas Eve, when no one would be paying attention. And of course we know that this is the tactic of those with something they're trying to sneak past the public's attention. And did Fitzgerald really make it that specific as to how many days to wait, or did the Obama folks ask him to say that, so they could release when it would make the least news?
Obviously newspeople have been trained to be suspicious and cynical by past experience with politicians, especially in the Bush/Rove years. So who is now piously pronouncing moral judgment? Karl Rove chimed in from his perch at Fox, saying Obama has not been transparent enough in this affair. Who annointed him spokesman for moral rectitude?
I just hope Obama releases the report and there’s absolutely nothing in it of any concern whatsoever. News people need to have repeated experiences of winding up with egg on their faces from trying to make something out of nothing.
The problem is that, when the newpeople create smoke, people begin to believe there’s a fire. Now there's a poll out showing that nearly half believe that Obama or his aides were involved with Blago and his crimes. And that will stick in minds long past the exoneration of this made-up "taint" of scandal.
Bah, humbug, indeed !
Ralph

Interesting idea

The news cycles never cease to amaze: an Iraqi newsman throws his shoes at Bush, shouting "Here's a goodbye kiss, you dog!" A respected financier turns out to have been a major fraud and bilked the rich and powerful of billions. A disgraced and perhaps deranged governor defies calls for resignation. Bush continues to spin his legacy. Obama continues to amaze with his appointments.

We've heard enough of all that. Here's an interesting idea from Steven Kornacki, writing in the New York Observer, "Here's How McCain Could Break the Presidential-Loser Mold." http://www.observer.com/2008/politics/why-mccain-could-break-presidential-loser-mold

Unlike others who recently lost their presidential races, John McCain is both still in office and too old to consider running again (John Kerry was still in office but kept running). This gives him a freedom to concentrate on rebuilding his reputation as an independent, non-ideological senator who can truly be a bipartisan bridge. He has already taken some steps, chiding his Republican colleagues for trying to tie Obama to Blagojevich.

What an opportunity both for McCain to redeem himself after a very ugly Rove-style campaign and to be a real asset across the aisle to help get Obama's agenda passed. And wouldn't it be ironic if he became the 60th vote that would allow the Democrats to move some crucial legislation, after he campaigned in Georgia to help defeat Jim Martin, the Democrat's last best hope for that 60th vote?

As their losing candidate and as one they never much liked anyway, he will not be the leading Republican voice. And it would burnish the image he seems most to cherish: maverick. It's up to McCain himself, of course. But, if he's a wise man and wants to be remembered for something other than his nasty smear campaign and for giving us Sarah Palin, he would do well to consider this way back to respect and self-respect.

Ralph

New hero

OK. I know Richard and I said we were going to downsize to a once-a-week, Monday blog. But Obama is creating such excitement (forget the troubles Rod Blogojevich has stirred up) with his cabinet and other top choices that I don't want to wait until Monday to comment.

My new hero is his choice for Energy Secretary: Nobel Prize winning physicist Dr. Steven Chu, who has impeccable credentials as an academic physicist, a world-class researcher in alternative energy, and an experienced administrator of high level physicist/energy/research organizations.

He's also a clear thinker and a practical innovator. In a talk he gave last year about the importance of simple energy efficiency, he described what happened when California passed a law requiring manufacturers to make more efficient refrigerators. They initially said it couldn't be done for a price people could afford. But California imposed the standards anyway. It was so successful that now those standards have been adopted nationwide. The result? Refrigerators are now 10% larger, energy used has dropped by 67%, and prices have been cut by 50%.

And Chu summarizes: What happens when manufacturers realize their lobbyists are not going to be able to sway the lawmakers, they shift their funding to their engineers instead of their lobbyists -- and they get the job done. The new efficient refrigerators have saved more energy than extra energy developed by all the wind turbines and solar cells in the country. It's important to do those too, but don't underestimate how much energy we can save simply by efficiency.

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/tny/2008/12/note-to-detroit-consider-the-r.html

What a difference it's going to make to have this man in charge instead of a Bush Energy Secretary who tries to sabotage any effort to require energy efficiency.

I'm waiting for Ralph Nader to eat crow and retract his statement that there's not much difference in the Democrats' and the Republicans' policies, so you should vote for him.

Ralph

More right notes from Obama

President-elect Barak Obama continues to amaze me by hitting almost all the right notes in the planning for his presidency. Although some progressives are disappointed by some of his nominees thus far, I think Tom Daschel is a great choice as Secretary of Health/Human Services with his ability to get health care reform pushed through Congress.

Obama seems to be choosing experience and stability for national defense and the economy. If his picks for those spots tended to be establisment, at least it's Clinton establishment, not Bush establishment. And his picking Rumsfeld's nemesis Gen. Shenseki for VA chief is very satisfying. I fully expect to see more progressive picks in his nominations for the other domestic policy posts: Energy, Labor, Interior, Environment, HUD, Transportation.

He continues to amaze with his latest announcement, this time by reaching out to the Muslim world. From today's Chicago Tribune:

Barack Obama says his presidency is an opportunity for the U.S. to renovate its relations with the Muslim world, starting the day of his inauguration and continuing with a speech he plans to deliver in an Islamic capital.

And when he takes the oath of office Jan. 20, he plans to be sworn in like every other president, using his full name: Barack Hussein Obama. [He later explained that he was not trying to make a statement one way or the other; simply that it's traditional to be sworn in using your full name, and he's not concerned about what people try to make of his middle name.]

"I think we've got a unique opportunity to reboot America's image around the world and also in the Muslim world in particular,'' Obama said Tuesday, promising an "unrelenting" desire to "create a relationship of mutual respect and partnership in countries and with peoples of good will who want their citizens and ours to prosper together."

The world, he said, "is ready for that message."

What a world of difference from divide-and-conquer, with-us-or-against-us, bring-'em-on George Bush. The contrast makes him look worse by the day, despite his pathetic but despicable attempts to create a positive spin for his legacy: Iraq was a success, No Child Left Behind was a great boon to education, he is most proud that "I did not sell my soul," and -- get this -- he says he restored dignity to the Oval Office. Well, if your only criterion for dignity is not having sex with female groupie-interns, maybe so. But otherwise, I just don't see any dignity in his performance or his image. How can a frat-boy impersonating a president create a sense of dignity? Obama has already, pre-inauguration, restored dignity to the office that George Bush could never accomplish.

Ralph

Echoes of Camelot

With our wise choice of Barak and Michelle Obama as our new First Family gradually becoming a reality, we're beginning to see with stark clarity what we've been missing in the White House. Not that Laura Bush didn't represent segments of Middle America -- she even had poetry readings (although one of the best, Sharon Olds, refused to participate because of Bush's Iraq war).

But it is so refreshing to look forward to the elevation of knowledge, science, and art again and also to an emphasis on a different kind of family values and national character. And to a President and First Lady who can articulate these things. It reminds me of the heady days of Camelot, when Jack and Jackie Kennedy turned the White House into an intellectual and artistic center following the days of Ike's decent ordinariness.

What Barak Obama said at the end of his Meet the Press interivew with Tom Brokaw yesterday literally brought tears of joy to my eyes and to several other friends:

MR. BROKAW: Let me ask you as we conclude this program this morning about whether you and Michelle have had any discussions about the impact that you're going to have on this country in other ways besides international and domestic policies. You're going to have a huge impact, culturally, in terms of the tone of the country.

PRES.-ELECT OBAMA: Right.

MR. BROKAW: Who are the kinds of artists that you would like to bring to the White House?

PRES.-ELECT OBAMA: Oh, well, you know, we have thought about this because part of what we want to do is to open up the White House and, and remind people this is, this is the people's house. There is an incredible bully pulpit to be used when it comes to, for example, education. Yes, we're going to have an education policy. Yes, we're going to be putting more money into school construction. But, ultimately, we want to talk about parents reading to their kids. We want to invite kids from local schools into the White House. When it comes to science, elevating science once again, and having lectures in the White House where people are talking about traveling to the stars or breaking down atoms, inspiring our youth to get a sense of what discovery is all about. Thinking about the diversity of our culture and, and inviting jazz musicians and classical musicians and poetry readings in the White House so that, once again, we appreciate this incredible tapestry that's America. I--you know, that, I think, is, is going to be incredibly important, particularly because we're going through hard times. And, historically, what has always brought us through hard times is that national character, that sense of optimism, that willingness to look forward, that, that sense that better days are ahead. I think that our art and our culture, our science, you know, that's the essence of what makes America special, and, and we want to project that as much as possible in the White House.

Ralph

April Fool's Day ??

My first thought, when I saw the headlines, was that it must be April Fool's Day or a page from The Onion. Huffington Post headlined two articles, side by side:

"Bush to Receive First-ever International Medal of Peace."

"I Was Unprepared for War . . . I'm sorry about the economy."

The Peace Medal is given by the Global PEACE Coalition in recognition of Bush's initiative to treat AIDS and malaria in Africa. This is perhaps the one area that he can take some credit for, although it's marred by his demand that one-third of the money be spent on abstinence-only sex eduation. He claims that it helped treat two million people; but that's a relatively small percent of those infected with AIDS in Africa, every single one of whom could be treated for a year with the money we spend in nine days of our war in Iraq.

The second headline touts an interview with Bush by Charlie Gibson. But don't let the headline fool you. Bush is expressing regrets about some things "that happened," but he's not taking an iota of responsibility. For example, he "regrets" that he was given "incorrect intelligence" that led to war. He takes no responsibility for not knowing what many of us on the street knew at the time.

On the economy: "I'm sorry it's happening, of course. . . . Obviously I don't like the idea of people losing jobs, or being worried about their 401(k)s. On the other hand, the American people got to know that we will safeguard the system. I mean, we're in. And if we need to be in more, we will."

Again, regrets that "it's happening." But no responsibility. We WILL safeguard the system, Sir? Why DIDN'T you safeguard the system when it would have mattered? And do you now support replacing the safeguards you and your Republican scrooges tore down?

No, I didn't think so. Please spare us the crocodile tears, Mr. Almost-Ex President. Go peddle your "regrets" for "things that happened" somewhere else.

Ralph

Obama's emergence as a strong president

Forget "inexperienced." It's been trumped by intelligence and competence. Forget Hillary's secret quote "he can't win." He won by bigger margins than Bill Clinton. Forget the attempt to smear with "socialism." Bailing out Wall Street is being called "corporate socialism," and the Republicans did it. Forget "most liberal senator." Thus far in his appointments, competence trumps ideology.

If anyone, at this point, has reason for concern, it is his liberal, progressive supporters. I don't share that concern. I have such confidence in Obama's judgment and his assessment of what is possible that I'm willing to relax and let him run the show. He doesn't need advice from me.

That may be short-sighted, but it is such a relief after eight years of gnashing my teeth over everything Bush/Cheney/Rove & Co. did. Still, Obama needs us progressives to keep the pressure on him to push forward -- despite the economy -- and at least make a start, by outlining plans for progressive legislation. He intends to do it; but faced with opposition in Congress, he will need a strong, grassroots pressure to back him up.

Thus far, Obama has assembled a team that will govern with intelligence, expertise, and pragmatism in the important areas of economy and national defense and law enforcement. Expect to see more liberal ideology showing up in later appointments: Health and Human Services (Daschle), Commerce (Richardson), and others such as Labor, EPA, Energy, Housing, Interior. Those are the areas for progressive policies and legislation.

So many myths the Repubs invented about the dangers of an Obama presidency are evaporating. I felt a rush of satisfaction as one more bit the dust: that the military will not respect him. He's already trumped that one too by quickly winning over the top military brass. He had a sit-down with Admiral Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the other day. According to the Washington Post, Adm. Mullen "came away with what he wanted: a view of the next president as a non-ideological pragmatist who was willing to both listen and lead. After the meeting, the chairman 'felt very good, very positive,' according to Mullen spokesman Capt. John Kirby."

The Post continued:

"But most important, according to several senior officers and civilian Pentagon officials . . . is the expectation of renewed respect for the chain of command and greater realism about U.S. military goals and capabilities, which many found lacking during the Bush years.

"Open and serious debate versus ideological certitude will be a great relief to the military leaders," said retired Maj. Gen. William L. Nash of the Council of Foreign Relations. Senior officers are aware that few in their ranks voiced misgivings over the Iraq war, but they counter that they were not encouraged to do so by the Bush White House or the Pentagon under Donald H. Rumsfeld.

"The joke was that when you leave a meeting, everybody is supposed to drink the Kool-Aid," Nash said. "In the Bush administration, you had to drink the Kool-Aid before you got to go to the meeting."

Sooner or later, Obama is going to make some missteps. Or he will run out of trump cards. But so far, his emergence as the President has been as nearly flawless as his campaign.

Ralph