At WHAT point does HE own it?
Posted: June 12, 2009 Filed under: Bailout Blues, Diplomacy Nightmares, Global Financial Crisis, Hillary Clinton: Her Campaign for All of Us, president teleprompter jesus, Surreality, Team Obama, Voter Ignorance | Tags: broken campaign promises 3 CommentsThe Political Memo in today’s NYT minces few words in Blaming the Guy Who Came Before Doesn’t Work Long and I’d like to just tag right along with that. Its thesis is clear. The Obama administration wastes no opportunity to turn the phrase “we inherited a lot of problems”.
As President Obama struggles to turn around the moribund economy and confront multiple international issues, he wastes few opportunities to remind the country that the problems are not of his making.
“The financial crisis this administration inherited is still creating painful challenges for businesses and families alike,” Mr. Obama said this week as he proposed spending limits.
“We inherited a financial crisis unlike any that we’ve seen in our time,” he said last week as he thrust General Motors into bankruptcy.
His advisers and allies follow the same script. “The Obama administration inherited a situation at Guantánamo that was intolerable,” James L. Jones, the national security adviser, said of the military prison in Cuba. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton defended the Obama foreign policy in the same vein. “We inherited a lot of problems,” she said.
Mr. Obama is hardly the first president to point to his predecessor. Ronald Reagan blamed Jimmy Carter for the poor economy he inherited, just as Bill Clinton blamed the first President Bush and the younger Mr. Bush then blamed Mr. Clinton. Former Bush aides like Karl Rove argue that Mr. Obama has done it more extensively and routinely than other presidents have, although the Obama team denies that.
But at a certain point, a new president assumes ownership of the problems and finds himself answering for his own actions. For Mr. Obama, even some advisers say that moment may be coming soon.
I’d really like to extend the question of when does he own it a bit further to what good does saying you inherited all these problems do when your solution is basically a continuation of those same failed policies?
In the two major areas of concern during the election and primary–the Iraq War and the Financial Crisis–we not only seen continuation of the same dysfunctional policies, but we’ve seeing appointment of the same dysfunctional policy makers in both cases. Timothy Geithner (with Obama’s consent and support) has basically been following the same policies of his predecessor Secretary of Wall Street Bailouts Hank Paulson. I know this because oc-08I’ve been following the economic policies quite closely because of obvious reasons. I have had to rely on others for examples in other policy areas. To say there is a plethora is understatement. I am getting tired of flushing spam from seriously delusional Obama voters into byte heaven that mostly reads: “Hillary would have done the same thing” and “he’s just doing what he has to at the moment, just wait it will change, you’ll see.”
Cannonfire has run a series of threads demonstrating how closely aligned President Obama’s policies have been to his predecessor. I’ve spent a few days following the links from The Worm turns and turns. One link is to Paul Craig Roberts at Global Research and the title absolutely says everything. It’s called Watching Obama Morph Into Dick Cheney. This one especially appeals to me because of a post I took a lot of grief for back in the day that used a side-by-side Broke Back Mountain view of the boyz will be boyz.
What’s that, Lassie? Little Timmy fell down the well?
Posted: June 2, 2009 Filed under: A My Pet Goat Moment, Diplomacy Nightmares, Equity Markets, Global Financial Crisis, Team Obama, The Media SUCKS, U.S. Economy Comments Off on What’s that, Lassie? Little Timmy fell down the well?
I’m not sure what Secretary Tim Geithner is smoking these days, but I’m sure there’s a huge market for it. Maybe we could tax it then pay off the national debt. The news of the Treasury Secretary’s trip to China is just developing enough of a surreal feel that I felt like Photoshopping a Buddhist begging bowl on to Beavis and entitling it Timmy Does China. However, I’m not that skilled at photo shop and I’m still trying to finish this paper on currency regimes so I don’t have the time to be that creatively unpaid. Let’s just label this a big enough reality disconnect to either be drug induced or a product of Hollywood. Well, not exactly Hollywood, but CNBC, is that close? This blurb is from a thread today at Market Watch.
U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said Tuesday that China has confidence in the U.S. economy, even as official Chinese editorials and news reports berated Washington for selling a “devalued dollar.”
Geithner, who was wrapping up a two-day visit to China, said officials there shared his positive economic outlook for the U.S. and understood the Obama administration’s need to run higher deficits for a temporary period.
“They’ve got a pretty good feel for what we are trying to do and are very supportive,” he said in an interview with CNBC.
I’m still wondering if the folks in charge of protocal and explaining how other cultures work are understaffed at the White House. Not since POTUS gave HRH an ipod with his speeches on it has there been such a misread of cultural differences. Somebody needs to explain to the Treasury Secretary that criticizing your future hosts (who are well known to be hyperconcerned for their national image) for currency manipulation in front of a world wide audience isn’t going to really get them to open up to you. Giethner’s confirmation hearing was labelled by the WSJ to be a China Bash.
Geithner’s visit to Beijing, his first since assuming the helm of the U.S. Treasury, included scheduled meetings with Chinese President Hu Jintao, Premier Wen Jiabao, and the nation’s top commerce, finance and banking officials.
In the CNBC interview, Geithner downplayed his earlier criticism of Beijing, in which he accused the Chinese government of keeping the yuan at an unreasonably low level against the U.S. dollar in order to boost China’s exports.
He did say, however, that China recognizes the need for a more flexible exchange-rate system, saying such a move “will help them … to use monetary policy to address future growth and inflation challenges.”
Geithner’s comments contrasted with the downbeat look at the U.S. economy reported in China’s state-run media.
I’m actually beginning to wonder if Geithner knows exactly what ‘state-run media’ implies here. Maybe a refresher from the State Department would have helped him on that too.
Who is Harshing our Memorial Day Weekend? Better yet, WHY?
Posted: May 25, 2009 Filed under: Diplomacy Nightmares, Team Obama Comments Off on Who is Harshing our Memorial Day Weekend? Better yet, WHY?
I was going to try to take a breather and stick to spring cleaning and cocktailing this weekend. The rest of the world evidently doesn’t know it’s the official start of the US summer! I suppose one of the things about blogging is its ability to play to the obsessive streak that probably exists in all bloggers. So, let me put this to you, because no one at BJ’s over on Rue Dauphine last night would engage my question. Doesn’t it strike you as being extremely coincidental that the same day North Korea sets off an underground nuke, we also wind up with a fleet of Iranian warships in the Gulf of Aden effectively threatening both Yemen and Saudi Arabia and we get a big no on the nuclear negotiations? I mean, what is up with this? Did the stars align just correctly on a Memorial Day weekend to send all moonbat dictators on world threat alert?
North Korea exploded a nuclear device Monday morning, startling the world with its second underground test in three years and vexing the Obama administration, which has said it wants to solve the nuclear impasse with North Korea.
The test, described as “successful” by the communist state’s official Korean Central News Agency, escalates a pattern of provocation that this spring has included a long-range missile launch, detention of two U.S. journalists, kicking out U.N. nuclear inspectors, restarting a plutonium factory and halting six-nation nuclear negotiations.
So, the Iranian rationale for sending six warships to the Gulf of Aden is piracy. However, theses pirates are from Somalia which is not so close to the Saudis. Some of the problem areas have been near Yemen but more south in the Indian Ocean and out toward the Arabian Sea. Why are these ships so far north?
Navy Commander Rear Admiral Habibollah Sayyari announced on Monday that Iran has sent 6 warships and logistic vessels to the Gulf of Aden and the surrounding international waters.
Sayyari, who made the remarks while visiting the development projects and installations of the Iranian Navy here in Tehran, described the measure as “unprecedented in the history of the Iranian Navy”, and added, “This important move indicates the country’s high military capability in confronting any kind of foreign threat along the coasts of the country.”
He expressed hope that the Iranian Navy experts and specialists would continue daily progress in all fields of surface and sub-surface and arms technology and production.
On May 15, Iran dispatched two warships to the troubled waters off the coast of Somalia and the Gulf of Aden to safeguard Iranian trade cargo ships against piracy.
The move was in line with UN resolutions 1838 and 1846 and a request by the Safety Committee of the International Maritime Organization (IMO).
Perhaps this is just a little bit of pre-election posturing by Iran’s ever colorful Ahmadinejad. Yes, maybe the mullahs have declared jihad on pirates. However, this news was also announced about the same time they rejected the latest Western nuclear deal. The most interesting part of the rejection was the challenge from Ahmadinejad to POTUS to engage in a debate on the floor of the UN. (Guess Ahmadinejad watched the Democractic primary debates and decided it would be an easy take down.)
Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on Monday rejected a Western proposal for it to “freeze” its nuclear work in return for no new sanctions and ruled out any talks with major powers on the issue.
The comments by the conservative president, who is seeking a second term in a June 12 election, are likely to further disappoint the U.S. administration of President Barack Obama, which is seeking to engage Iran diplomatically.
The United States, Russia, China, France, Germany and Britain said in April they would invite Iran to a meeting to try and find a diplomatic solution to the nuclear row.
The West accuses Iran of secretly developing atomic weapons. Iran, the world’s fifth-largest oil exporter, denies the charge and says it only wants nuclear power to generate electricity.
Breaking with past U.S. policy of shunning direct talks with Iran, Obama’s administration last month said it would join nuclear discussions with Tehran from now on.
Ahmadinejad proposed a debate with Obama at the United Nations in New York “regarding the roots of world problems” but he made clear Tehran would not bow to pressure on the nuclear issue.
So, FOX news has trotted out John Bolton who of course sees this as a vindication of his overtly militaristic approach to diplomacy. Thankfully, all he can do is bloviate with the other bloviaters at this point and SOS Clinton is currently on the phone with the other countries involved with the so-called six party talks. Bolton’s analysis seemed to contradict all that Bush insistence on the six party talks.
“This is a moment of truth for this administration,” Bolton told AFP.
“They put all of their faith in the six-party talks. The North Koreans have thumbed their nose at the administration and now we have to see what kind of stuff they (the new administration) are made of,” Bolton said.
He urged Obama’s team to first put North Korea back on the list of state sponsors of terrorism following its removal in the waning months of the Bush administration.
Bolton also urged the UN Security Council to expel Pyongyang from the world body as a “persistent violator” of UN resolutions.
Ultimately, Bolton said, North Korea wants nuclear weapons because it is motivated by the desire to preserve its isolated dictatorship, adding it has no interest in nuclear diplomacy.
Excuse me, but if you’re complaining that we’ve had such bad results from the six party talks over the years, isn’t part of that your faulty strategy? Or are you now saying you were just following orders then? So, why are all these thing escalating right now? AND, why are they harshing a perfectly good three day American Holiday? Inquiring and obsessive bloggers like me, want to know.





Recent Comments