Finally, Barack!

Barack Obama had the center stage tonight at the Democratic convention. Over 80,000 people were present at the stadium. Millions of people watching on TV. High expectations. Many were suspicious and distrusting, many hopeful.
I thought he came out strong and believable with realistic ideas and sensible speech. He made me feel like he can handle the task of being president and that he will really do some of the things he has promised. I can live with that.
--- T

Bill's Turn

Listening to Bill Clinton speak last night at the convention made me remember very fondly, why I loved the 90's. Only Bill Clinton could match the eloquence of Hillary Clinton. What a team! I admire their commitment to their ideals, their intelligence, and their sense of what's important. I don't care what the critics say, they rock!
--- T

Hillary's Night at the Convention

By Steven Rosenfeld

Hillary Clinton urged her supporters to rally behind Barack Obama in a passionate and forceful address at the Democratic convention on Tuesday night that underscored her historic candidacy as the first woman to come within reach of a major political party's presidential nomination.
"I am so honored to be here tonight. I am here tonight as a proud mother, as a proud Democrat, as a proud senator from New York, a proud American and a proud supporter of Barack Obama," Clinton began, eliciting a rousing ovation. "My friends, it is time to take back the country we love, and whether you voted for me or you voted for Barack, the time is now to unite as a single party with a single purpose."
"We are on the same team, and none of us can afford to sit on the sidelines," Clinton continued. "This is a fight for the future, and it is a fight we must win together. I haven't spent the past 35 years in the trenches, advocating for children, campaigning for universal health care, helping parents balance work and family, and fighting for women's rights here at home and around the world to see another Republican in the White House squander our promise. No way, no how, no McCain."

Hillary was at her best last night at the Democratic convention: generous, passionate, smart, eloquent - a leader. I think some are having second thoughts about voting for Obama, who seems to be a bit lost right now... But Hillary was more than willing to put the battles behind and go forward with unity. Good for her!
--- T

Joe Biden

Barack Obama chose Joe Biden as his running mate for President. Not a bad choice from my perspective, but I am disappointed because I still was expecting that he pick Hillary for VP. Joe Biden is experienced and smart, although I think he is too much in the pocket of large corporations - but who isn't? That's what American politics is all about: large corporations fund/own main stream politics on the right and left. It is practically impossible to run for office in this country without the help/approval of big money and big corporations.
- T

Olympics

I was watching women's gymnastics tonight. American Shawn Johnson won gold on the balance beam. It was fascinating to see her happy, shiny face; she smiled all the way through the competition while her teammate Nastia Liukin frowned while winning silver. Their outlook on life seemed so apparent on their faces and in their eyes. One positive, one negative.
- T

Ron Suskind Interview

One more time I have to bring up Ron Suskind. I listened to his interview by Amy Goodman about his new book: The Way of the World. He is intelligent, knowledgeable, and hopeful. His main point in the interview is that because of all the lies and manipulation by the Bush administration America has lost its authority in the world. This is serious, and has consequences - now other powers feel like they really don't have to listen to Americans talk about "human rights" and "democracy" because they have not followed the same principles themselves. Example: in Georgia one Russian soldier was interviewed about attacking and occupying the country; his reply: "If America can take Baghdad, why can we not take Tbilisi?"
-T

Interview

Georgia and Finland

Zbigniew Brzezinski compares Russia's attack on Georgia to that of Stalin's on Finland in 1939. Now that's scary stuff! Is Russia a warm, cuddly bear or a nasty, voracious imperialist beast? See whole article below.
--- T

Georgia-Finland

Macho-Politics

Paul Krugman:

What I mean, instead, is that know-nothingism -- the insistence that there are simple, brute-force, instant-gratification answers to every problem, and that there's something effeminate and weak about anyone who suggests otherwise -- has become the core of Republican policy and political strategy. The party's de facto slogan has become: "Real men don't think things through."

So true. T

Ron Suskind's New Book

Ron Suskind's latest book, The Way of the World sounds really interesting, although nothing seems to surprise - or move - us any more. His book just confirms everything most of us already know about George W. Bush and his administration: lies, deception, fanaticism. I wrote an essay three years ago based on Ron Suskind's 2004 article Without a Doubt. I compared George Bush's foreign policy doctrine to Hans J. Morgenthau's idea of realism based on Suskind's article. I think I was quite correct in my estimation. My essay below. T

Ron Suskind

Running the World on Faith

What would Morgenthau say? According to Ron Suskind, George W. Bush is running the most powerful country - and the world - on his instincts and his faith, not on the principles based on the theory of realism championed by Hans J. Morgenthau (Suskind, 2004). Actually George W. Bush’s foreign policy is a strange concoction of Moses trying to find a way to the Promised Land through the wilderness, and realism’s belief in man’s intrinsically evil and untrustworthy nature. He acts as if God speaks to him directly, and those near him must trust his leadership without question or doubt. This type of autocratic leadership conflicts with democratic principles of openness and rationality.

Hans J. Morgenthau asserted that there are certain principles that guide (or ought to guide) foreign policy decisions of State leaders. He called these the “six principles of political realism” (Morgenthau, 1978). According to Morgenthau human nature is depraved, and always seeks self-interest, and thus nation-States will pursue their national interests, making cooperation challenging at best. One could argue that George W. Bush believes this principle to be (partially) true: all other (non-western) nations are evil, and endeavor to destroy the morally superior United States of America and its western values. Bush’s solution is that the United States must act first (pre-emptive war) to prevent this destruction. President Bush is willing to act unilaterally without entangling alliances. Indeed, he seems to prefer to go it alone: the risks are greater, but so are the rewards. To George W. Bush there are no feelings of ambivalence or confusing grey areas of diplomacy that require negotiation. Others are either with him or against him, and they must choose accordingly. Jesus himself said: "He who is not with Me is against Me; and he who does not gather with Me scatters” (Matt.12:30). With such powerful friends, who needs cumbersome alliances?

Morgenthau believed that States should seek balance of power in order to avoid conflict and war. George W. Bush parts ways with him also with respect to this principle: The United States is better off being the single superpower in the world. According to Ron Suskind, an aide of Bush described the “new reality” of the United States after 9/11:

''We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.'' (Suskind, 2004)

To Morgenthau the guiding principle of political realism is prudence. According to Webster’s New Collegiate Dictionary prudence means: “the ability to govern and discipline oneself by the use of reason; sagacity or shrewdness in the management of affairs; skill and good judgement in the use of resources; caution or circumspection as to danger or risk” (Merriam-Webster, 1976). According to Suskind the Bush White House disdains rationality and good judgement as the basis for making decisions; instead, action, based on gut instinct and trust in one’s righteous cause, sets the pace for foreign policy. Faith and loyalty are expected and even demanded. Risks are evaluated on a biblical scale of right and wrong. Risking (or sacrificing) the lives of American soldiers and enemy civilians are well worth it in the heavenly battle of good and evil.

But can democracy sustain this type of insult without serious damage? What if George W. Bush’s faith isn’t enough? What if his interpretation of the Holy Scriptures is faulty? Morgenthau states that we “cannot conclude from the good intentions of a statesman that his foreign policies will be either morally praiseworthy or politically successful” (Morgenthau, 1978). It is dangerous to assume that one knows what is best for the world. Realism expects us to judge political actions by their political consequences, not by their “good” motives, for “there can be no political morality without prudence; that is, without consideration of the political consequences of seemingly moral action (Morgenthau, 1978).

T --- 2005