The World in 2012: What's Next?

The Atlantic website posted an interesting, and fascinating, list of foreign policy events to keep an eye on 2012.  One event missing from the list is the 2012 Olympics, which set up to show off Great Britain, still separate from the European Union and smarting from this year's riots, to the world once again. In a sense it may be the last hurrah for the British on the world stage, as 2014 and 2016 will focus the world's eyes on the rising power of Brazil.

What is most concerning about the list, however, is what is NOT on it. After all, a year ago how many people predicted the Arab Spring, or Occupy Wall Street? As the world focuses attention on America's presidential race, the upheaval in the Arab world, the potential collapse (or salvation) of the Eurozone, and revolutionary zeal reaching even Russia and China, the potential of the unknown is out there as well.

One last note: Syria's slide into civil war needs to be noted again here. It's featured on The Atlantic's list, but isn't getting nearly the kind of press coverage it deserves. Syria being unstable effects Lebanon, as well as the Israel-Palestine crisis. Not to mention the fact that Iran may lose a valuable ally in that part of the Arab world.

Speaking of Iran, it seems everyone has forgotten about their nuclear program. Well, almost everyone. Iran's program continues, and it may be reaching a point of no return soon. And when I mean soon, I mean in 2012.

And with such a situation, President Obama will be caught in a difficult dilemma:

For the time being, Israel is not needling Mr. Obama. Rather the opposite.

“We are asked, sometimes,” Mr. Barak has said, “whether Obama is really a soft appeaser.” His answer: “You discern a man who is capable and ready to take on the fiercest of political risks in order to make good what he believes in.” He added, “Go ask Osama bin Laden.”

That’s not as unsubtle flattery as it might seem.

The remarks are aimed at voters to raise the bar of expectations for Mr. Obama’s support of Israel on Iran. The dynamics of the campaign mean he will most likely have to provide Americans with an unequivocal orientation well before November — the same likelihood and time frame Mr. Perkovich sees for Iran “to take steps, albeit insufficient ones, to indicate there’s some traction in the diplomatic approach.”

That's from the New York Times piece linked above. The election campaign next year, while about domestic economic issues, may very well pivot on foreign policy crises, and how President Obama has (and will handle) them.

May you live in interesting times, indeed.

Don't Look West, Young Man....Look South

News from Iowa in the last two months has been as topsy turvy a political story as anyone has seen in years. While Mitt Romney has stayed near the top, the GOP has seen several front runners come and go: Rick Perry, Herman Cain, and most recently Newt Gingrich. Ron Paul has rallied his supporters in the last two weeks, and now it appears that the oft-forgotten Rick Santorum is seeing a surge of his own in poll numbers.


While on the web and among talking heads, the discussion has been about Iowa being a chance to Ron Paul to steal the show, for Newt Gingrich's campaign to take a serious hit, and for the disaster known as Rick Perry to continue to careen out of control, I really don't think any of this matters. Remember that Mike Hukabee won Iowa in 2008, and look at where his campaign ended. After all, the real test is in South Carolina.

That's right: the heart of Southern Conservatism, South Carolina, is the real test for any GOP candidate. Consider this: since 1980, in years when it was an open and contested primary, whoever has won South Carolina has won the Republican Party's nomination. And it's also worth noting that, while South Carolina voters are very, very conservative, they also tend to be pragmatic in their choices. According to South Carolina political observers, the state's GOP is torn between traditional Republicans and Tea Party conservatives.

At this moment, Gingrich leads in South Carolina. He knows the importance of winning here as does Romney and the other candidates.Of course voters in the state know it too. But will they go with their hearts, which means anyone but Romney? Or with their heads, and back a man who they may not trust but gives them the best chance of defeating President Obama?

I suspect the latter. But time will tell. If Romney stumbles in both Iowa AND New Hampshire, then all bets are off.

The Illusion of a Classless Society

William Domhoff came up with this chart. Furthermore:

According to a Roll Call analysis of Congress members’ financial disclosure forms, the collective net worth of American lawmakers jumped 25 percent to over $2 billion in just the last two years — with 50 of the richest Congressmen and women accounting for 90 percent of the increase. 

In 2008, the minimum net worth of House Members was just over $1 billion. In 2010, it rose to $1.26 billion. Senators experienced a more modest increase during this same time period, going from $651 million in 2008 to $784 million last year.

While the rest of the country has suffered through this recession/depression, our Congressmen and women have actually gotten richer in the past two years. With the poverty rate now hovering around 50%, its no wonder that the approval rate of Congress is so low. Me thinks that 2012 will be tough terrain for any incumbent, Democrat or Republican. The problem is that voters, exasperated by both parties, have no where to turn to.

Republicans Cave: House, Senate Pass Two-Month Extension

Payroll Tax Cut Bill: House, Senate Pass Two-Month Extension:

The two-month package preserves a $1,500 payroll tax cut for the middle class and extends unemployment benefits that were set to expire at the end of the year, preventing an abrupt cutoff for nearly 2 million long-term jobless in January alone. The bill also extends the "doc fix," a stopgap that prevents Medicare reimbursement rates for doctors from being automatically slashed. 

But the bill also marks the beginning of the end for a maximum limit of 99 weeks of unemployment insurance. Although the deal reauthorizes federal unemployment programs, it does not make a change needed to prevent the loss of 20 weeks of benefits in most states over the course of 2012. The reduction in benefits represents Democrats' quiet embrace of part of the GOP's proposed reforms to the unemployment insurance system.

This is a big win for the Obama administration. President Obama has seen his approval ratings rebound in recent weeks. Several factors contribute to this bump but main among them is the American public's increasing disdain for Congress. In a recent poll it was found that approval rating for Congress had reached an all-time low of 11%. To put that into perspective, the following things are more popular than Congress: the IRS, Oil Spills, Lawyers, and Communism. Juxtaposed against an institution this unpopular, the President doesn't seem so bad. Congress and House Republicans in particular are losing their leverage against the President. All year Republicans were adamant that tax hikes on the rich were off the table. Yet when it came time to extend a largely middle and working-class tax cut (payroll tax) they refused, merely for the sake of opposing the President. Americans are getting tired of a do-nothing Congress that mainly protects the interests of the rich. This gives President Obama plenty of fuel for his reelection campaign. Though he hasn't deliver on many of his promises, at the very least he can run against Congress, similar to what Harry Truman did in 1948. 


Combined with the fact that GOP has a lackluster field of candidates vying for the Presidential nomination, Obama has plenty to be optimistic about. His biggest threat would be Mitt Romney, and honestly his candidacy has more holes in it than Augusta National. If the economy can continue to rebound, his 2nd term would be all but assured. 

Can Ron Paul Win?

Andrew Sullivan makes a good case for Ron Paul with his endorsement here. Especially the last part:

I feel the same way about him on the right in 2012 as I did about Obama in 2008. Both were regarded as having zero chance of being elected. And around now, people decided: Why not? And a movement was born. He is the "Change You Can Believe In" on the right. If you are an Independent and can vote in a GOP primary, vote Paul. If you are a Republican concerned about the degeneracy of the GOP, vote Paul. If you are a citizen who wants more decency and honesty in our politics, vote Paul. If you want someone in the White House who has spent decades in Washington and never been corrupted, vote Paul. 

Oh, and fuck you, Roger Ailes.

And while I share some of the same misgivings about Paul that Sullivan has, stated here:

Let me immediately say I do not support many of his nuttier policy proposals. I am not a doctrinaire libertarian. Paul's campaign for greater oversight of the Fed is great, but abolition of it is utopian and dangerous. A veto of anything but an immediately balanced budget would tip the US and the world into a serious downturn (a process to get there in one or two terms makes much more sense). Cutting taxes as he wants to is also fiscally irresponsible without spending cuts first. He adds deductions to the tax code rather than abolish them. His energy policy would intensify our reliance on carbon, not decrease it. He has no policy for the uninsured. There are times when he is rightly described as a crank. He has had associations in the past that are creepy when not downright ugly.

Despite this, I am coming around to the idea of voting for him in the Georgia primaries. Although I consider myself politically left-of-center, I am a registered independent in the state of Georgia. I did this because Georgia's closed primary process bans members of the opposite party from participating and because frankly the Democratic Party has done enough to earn my membership. I've studied Paul closely since the 2008 campaign due to his uniqueness within the Republican Party. He's sort of a hard guy to wrap your arms around. He's one of the few Republicans today honest about the problems facing this country. When it comes to such issues as foreign policy, the military-industrial complex, the drug war, marriage equality, and the Patriot Act; I am in fully agreement with him. I find his emphasis on decentralizing power away from the federal government and back towards state and local governments as something that could help this country bypass the gridlock that plague Washington these days. Yet when I look at some of his proposals for fixing said problems I start to cringe. He's proposed eliminating the Federal Reserve, all federal student aid, the Department of Energy, Commerce, Interior, Education, Housing and Urban Development, and the TSA. These moves would most certainly do more harm than good. His stance on immigration would leave the door open for more Arizona-type laws to get passed. The racist and bigoted newletters that came out of his office during the early 90s deserve further explanation as well.


Yet, despite all of his weirder policy proposals, you can't say that Paul lied or pandered to the electorate. He's trying to get elected by trying to have an honest conversation with Americans, which is more than we can say for the current front runners: Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich. Paul is the only GOP candidate to realize that policing the world isn't America's job, nor a job that it can afford. When asked during last week's debate whether he would attack Iran should they obtain nuclear weapons, Paul steadfastly refused, the only candidate to do so. I may not agree with with all of Ron Paul's beliefs but I can at least say that I half-agree with him, which is more than I can say about the rest of the field (save Gary Johnson and Jon Huntsman). Dr. Paul may not be right about the prescriptions but he's right about the diagnoses. And an honest debate between Barack Obama and Ron Paul about the serious issues facing America might be what this country needs right now. 


Part of me wants him to win the GOP nomination for this reason, the other part of me wants him to win for purely selfish, anarchist reasons: so I can watch the GOP establishment (AKA Fox News) freak out at the prospect. Before Ron Paul was nothing more than a political curiosity. But now, with him holding the lead in the polls in Iowa, and placed 2nd in New Hampshire, he now has to be taken seriously. His fund raising has been excellent, he's got an great ground operation, and his well-made attack ads have been pummeling Gingrich and Romney. He's using essentially the same strategy that propelled Barack Obama to the Presidency in 2008. I am under no illusion that Ron Paul will win the nomination, we still have a long way to go. But we've seen what a win in Iowa can do (Obama in 2008), if he rode momentum from that  victory and pulled off the upset in libertarian-leaning New Hampshire, all bets are off.

Anarchism and the Occupy Movement

Occupy and anarchism's gift of democracy | David Graeber:

This is not the first time a movement based on fundamentally anarchist principles – direct action, direct democracy, a rejection of existing political institutions and attempt to create alternative ones – has cropped up in the US. The civil rights movement (at least, its more radical branches), the anti-nuclear movement, the global justice movement … all took similar directions. Never, however, has one grown so startlingly quickly.

Great piece by David Graeber. This has been a topic that has been weighing on my mind for weeks now. For most Americans the word "anarchy" conjures up visions of masked malcontents smashing windows and looting television sets. History buffs will be quick to remind us that President William McKinley was assassinated by self-confessed anarchist Leon Czolgosz. TV pundits today attempt to discredit the Occupy movement by calling them "anarchists." But what the media fails to tell us is what anarchism really is.

Our rulers, anyway, seem to labor under a lingering fear that if any significant number of Americans do find out what anarchism really is, they may well decide that rulers of any sort are unnecessary. 

There is no discussion about the pillars of the anarchist philosophy such as direct democracy, opposition to authority, and nonviolence. We are just fed horror stories about how anarchism will lead to a Somalia/Mad Max scenario where roving armed gangs rule the countryside. What they don't tell you is that the decision making process at the Occupy protests looks more like Athenian democracy than a some kind of post-apocalyptic wasteland. While there are many different strains of anarchism, most anarchists consider themselves anti-coercion, anti-aggression, and anti-corporate. Anarchism at its core is a peaceful democratic movement. But anarchism's major problem is that successful examples are hard to find in human history. Perhaps the most famous attempt at an anarchist society outside of hunter-gatherers and pirate colonies was in Catalonia during the Spanish Civil War. This experiment, famously described by George Orwell in Homage to Catalonia, was short lived but radically transformed Spanish society in a short amount of time. However the experiment was short lived; once Stalin joined the Republican war effort, he moved quickly to crush the anarchists who he viewed as aligned with Leon Trotsky. Since then anarchism has been viewed more as an oddity than a legitimate political philosophy.

The pundits are half right, the Occupy movement is anarchist to some extent. It's leaderless, they make all of their decisions through direct democracy in general assemblies, and they believe in direct action. But its not just the Occupy movement that has adopted some or all of these tactics. The protests of the Arab Spring have been described as leaderless, anti-authoritarian movements using direct action to get what they want. Youth all over the Middle East saw societies with skyrocketing costs of living, no jobs to pay for it, and no freedom with which to voice their concerns. Nobody believed these movements would succeed in obtaining their aims. Many of the same criticisms levied against the Occupiers were used against the Arab Springers. That their lack of an anointed leadership and coherent set of demands would lead to their downfall. But here we are, almost a year later, and these protests succeeded in toppling four governments. What pundits don't realize is that the strength of these movements comes from the very thing that they believe is their weakness.

After all, since 2007, just about every previous attempt to kick off a nationwide movement against Wall Street took exactly the course such people would have recommended – and failed miserably. It is only when a small group of anarchists in New York decided to adopt the opposite approach – refusing to recognise the legitimacy of the existing political authorities by making demands of them; refusing to accept the legitimacy of the existing legal order by occupying a public space without asking for permission, refusing to elect leaders that could then be bribed or co-opted; declaring, however non-violently, that the entire system was corrupt and they rejected it; being willing to stand firm against the state's inevitable violent response – that hundreds of thousands of Americans from Portland to Tuscaloosa began rallying in support, and a majority declared their sympathies.

This is why the Occupy movement has been so popular, because it offers something different. Occupiers view the system as being deeply flawed and corrupt. Government and corporations have become one in the same. We have a government that caters exclusively to the richest 1% of its citizens. A government where Wall Street bankers are hired as regulators and politicians are hired as lobbyists.  Giving a corrupt government like this a list of demands only legitimizes that government. This is where anarchism offers something entirely different. By refusing to play by the old rules, by refusing to give demands, by refusing to appoint leaders, it doesn't simply aim to reform the system, they want to overhaul the system from the ground up. Whether the Occupy movement will last or will even succeed at bringing about the change that they want, remains to be seen. But the mere fact that it is so popular and it has lasted this long proves that people are looking for alternatives. Who knew those alternatives would be Mikhail Bakunin and Pierre-Joseph Proudhon?

China and India: The Hare and the Tortoise?

New York Times: India Looks To China for inspiration....and with some fear.

No surprise here, India's comparing itself to that economic, political, and military giant to their north, the People's Republic of China. There's been quite a bit of talk in the last five years about India's remarkable growth and how it compares to the economic explosion in China that's taken place since the 1990s. The title for this particular blog post comes from a book, mentioned in the article, about the economic race between the two nations.


Some in the USA, wary of the rise of China and seeing a kindred democratic spirit in India, want to make the South Asian power into our newest ally in the region. Relations between our two countries were far too contentious during the Cold War, as India's non-alignment policy was seen by the USA as nothing more than a pro-Soviet posture. That became a reality after 1971, when Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger decided to "tilt" the US towards Pakistan during their war with India, mainly to get their assistance in opening up relations with...wait for it...China.

I'm not sure if we'll be able to recruit India in a new coalition to contain future Chinese expansionism. With America's complicated relationship with Pakistan not getting any simpler, though, and with fears of China's rise, now may be the best time to take a step forward towards India. Allowing their Prime Minister of India to speak before Congress several times in the last 15 years was a token of genuine friendship, not given often.

Of course, India has its own interests, and they're also still smarting over the disastrous 1962 war with China. They know they aren't strong enough yet to assert their dominance beyond South Asia. But when that day comes (and I think it will), Asia's going to get even more interesting. I didn't even mention Russia, Japan, and the two Koreas. But it gives an even deeper impression that the 21st century will be the Asian Century, whereas the 20th century was the American Century. Of course, we have a long way to go yet.

--Robert Greene II

Tent City Movement Grows in Israel

Tent City Grows - The Dish

Add up the estimates of 300,000 in Tel Aviv and 30,000 in Jerusalem and more elsewhere and you come to this startling idea: one out of every 20 Israelis was on the streets demanding a better country Saturday night – the equivalent of three million people in France, four million in Egypt, 15 million in the United States. And those comparisons themselves shatter, because, as Ma’ariv’s NRG site reported, the police couldn’t possibly keep track of the crowd that broke down gates and overflowed into alleys and side streets. Or as a police source told the paper: “This is the biggest demonstration we’ve ever, ever faced. We’re seeing hundreds of cars that have simply been left on the Ayalon Freeway and people are walking to the demonstration.” And that’s besides the people who couldn’t get on the overpacked trains to Tel Aviv.

This is kind of a complex issue but I'll try and simplify it the best that I can. Basically, there is a housing "shortage" in Israel and to steal a phrase from Jimmy McMillan: "The rent is too damn high!" Israelis have taken to the streets in protest of the sky-rocketing cost of living. With cities like Tel Aviv unwilling to take on more density and build upwards and the desert being uninhabitable, that leaves only one other option: settlements. As Matt Yglesias explains this puts pressure on the Israeli government to expand settlements into the Palestinian territories. Of course this adds yet another complex dimension to a conflict with no foreseeable end in sight. 

As it turns out, Bribery does work

Bribery Got Bin Laden - The Dish

Forget the cover story of waterboarding-leads-to-courier-leads-to bin Laden...Sources in the intelligence community tell me that after years of trying and one bureaucratically insane near-miss in Yemen, the US government killed OBL because a Pakistani intelligence officer came forward to collect the approximately $25 million reward from the State Department's Rewards for Justice program.

Turns out that it wasn't torture that lead to Bin Laden, it was bribery. Someone within Pakistani intelligence stepped forward to collect the $25 million bounty of OBL's head. Of course I doubt this bit of fact will ever penetrate the wall of lies the right-wing so skillfully hides behind. But politics aside, the bigger point however is that if it was indeed a Pakistani intelligence officer that told us of OBL's whereabouts it confirms what many of us have already suspected. That high-level members of the Pakistani Government knew Bin Laden was there and were protecting him. It's no longer an issue of "did they know?" as much as it is "how much did they know?"

Mexican Migration North Sputters to a Trickle

For all this talk about illegal immigration the media has overlooked one glaring fact. The New York Times explains:

Douglas S. Massey, co-director of the Mexican Migration Project at Princeton, an extensive, long-term survey in Mexican emigration hubs, said his research showed that interest in heading to the United States for the first time had fallen to its lowest level since at least the 1950s. “No one wants to hear it, but the flow has already stopped,” Mr. Massey said, referring to illegal traffic. “For the first time in 60 years, the net traffic has gone to zero and is probably a little bit negative.” 

The decline in illegal immigration, from a country responsible for roughly 6 of every 10 illegal immigrants in the United States, is stark. The Mexican census recently discovered four million more people in Mexico than had been projected, which officials attributed to a sharp decline in emigration.

What is this decrease attributed too? 

 In simple terms, Mexican families are smaller than they had once been. The pool of likely migrants is shrinking. Despite the dominance of the Roman Catholic Church in Mexico, birth control efforts have pushed down the fertility rate to about 2 children per woman from 6.8 in 1970, according to government figures. So while Mexico added about one million new potential job seekers annually in the 1990s, since 2007 that figure has fallen to an average of 800,000, according to government birth records. By 2030, it is expected to drop to 300,000.

And...

A significant expansion of legal immigration — aided by American consular officials — is also under way. Congress may be debating immigration reform, but in Mexico, visas without a Congressionally mandated cap on how many people can enter have increased from 2006 to 2010, compared with the previous five years. 

State Department figures show that Mexicans who have become American citizens have legally brought in 64 percent more immediate relatives, 220,500 from 2006 through 2010, compared with the figures for the previous five years. Tourist visas are also being granted at higher rates of around 89 percent, up from 67 percent, while American farmers have legally hired 75 percent more temporary workers since 2006.

AND...

 Still, education represents the most meaningful change. The census shows that throughout Jalisco, the number of senior high schools or preparatory schools for students aged 15 to 18 increased to 724 in 2009, from 360 in 2000, far outpacing population growth. The Technological Institute of Arandas, where Angel studies engineering, is now one of 13 science campuses created in Jalisco since 2000 — a major reason professionals in the state, with a bachelor’s degree or higher, also more than doubled to 821,983 in 2010, up from 405,415 in 2000.

While stories Mexican Cartels and illegal immigration laws have dominated our headlines, Mexico has quietly improving. Our net migration rate from Mexico has hit zero. Immigration is at its lowest levels since 1950. Part of this is due to our recession but a large part of it is due to the improving situation in Mexico. Educational opportunities are expanding, infrastructure has improved, and jobs are being created. Imagine that? Investing in infrastructure and education helping the economy? Anyways, I digress. Conversely, the cost of being smuggled across the border has more than tripled in last 15 years. The violence at the border is actually preventing immigration north. Increased security along the Texas and California borders has forced immigrants to take the more dangerous Arizona route. Its not longer worth it to cross the border. If and when Mexico gets the security situation under control, they might finally be ready to make that giant leap forward. 

Al-Qaeda Close to Collapse

The Washington Post

Defense Secretary Leon E. Panetta declared during a recent visit to Afghanistan that “we’re within reach of strategically defeating al-Qaeda.” The comment was dismissed by skeptics as an attempt to energize troops while defending the administration’s decision to wind down a decade-old war....  

Largely because of bin Laden’s death, “we can even see the end of al-Qaeda as the global, borderless, united jihad,” said another U.S. official, who also spoke on the condition of anonymity.

Great news. The article points towards Yemen as the new focus of the War on Terror. If this is the case, does this mean we can pull out of Afghanistan now?

The Debt Ceiling For Dummies

The Dish | By Andrew Sullivan

If you are still trying to understand what the debt ceiling debate is all about I completely understand. Unless you have a degree in Economics its just not an issue most Americans are familiar with. The chart above however puts it in terms that everybody who has a checking account can understand. If the debt ceiling isn't raised by August 2nd the U.S. Treasury runs out of money. Without the ability to take on more debt we will be unable to pay our bills. The military won't be getting paid, government employees won't be getting paid, social security checks will stop going out, medicare will be suspended, and our credit rating will be downgraded making our bonds useless. Simply put mass chaos would ensue. 


If a deal is not done there are a couple of things that might save us from armageddon. First off, its hard for me to believe that the debt rating service Moody's would downgrade our debt, knowing full well that such a move would send world markets into free fall. I doubt they have the balls to do that. Secondly, I still hold out hope that Obama will invoke the 14th amendment and service our debt regardless of the debt ceiling. The reason he hasn't committed to it yet is because he doesn't want to undermine negotiations. It would be irresponsible of him to send this country into a depression when he had a tool at his disposal to prevent it and chose not use it. Bill Clinton has already come out in favor of such a move. I still hold out an irrational hope that one side will give in, at this point I don't care which side it is, as long as it gets done.

The Space Shuttle and the End of American Exceptionalism

Last week saw the final flight of an American space shuttle, as Atlantis completed her trip to the International Space Station (ISS) and landed with no problems.

The final flight was greeted with nostalgia by many talking heads in the press, sad to see the end of an era in America's domination of space flight. For now and the foreseeable future, American astronauts will be ferried to and from the ISS via the Russian Soyuz rockets. I have to admit, I feel embarrassed that, after putting a man on the moon and fulfilling JFK's vision, we're reduced to relying on another nation to get our brave men and women into space.

I understand the budgetary constraints NASA operates under. In fact NASA has had budget issues since the end of the Space Race in the early 1970s. At the time, many in NASA dreamed that going to the Moon was just the first step to going to Mars. But the crises of the 1970s (economic stagflation, War in Vietnam,  oil shocks, etc.) killed the dream. Ever since then, American politicians have talked about plans to go to Mars, but every decade has gone by with simple talk, and nothing more.


As a young boy, I dreamed of going to the stars as an astronaut.  These days my dreams are little different, but I still look up to the skies in amazement. But beyond simply demoralizing the space program and killing American scientific and technological advancement the end of the Space Shuttle and cutbacks to the space program overall tell me that our nation has become unable to do great things.

Currently, Washington D.C. is the site of negotiations to raise the debt ceiling. News about the project, which was never much of an issue until now, has become more depressing and, quite frankly, more frustrating. A government unable to do previously simple things worries me. But we need to be able to do the big things, like addressing infrastructure, education, and sensible reform of Medicare/Medicaid or else our country is done for.

America is in decline relative to the rise of other, newer powers such as China, Brazil, and India. It does not have to be that our decline is a sudden thud, or that we even become less relevant in the world. We still shine as a beacon of hope and freedom to millions of people around the world, and our culture is still embraced by many. But becoming a nation that can't do the big things, the medium-sized things, and the small things...is a recipe for a nation that no longer has the will to lead.

Some think the end of the shuttle means the beginning of private investment into space travel. Perhaps that will be the case. But one hopes that this isn't the end of Americans being allowed to dream big, think big, and achieve even bigger realities.

--Robert

Captain Planet Movie?

Live Action Captain Planet Movie?

Speaking about the superhero, Stuart Snyder, president of Turner's chidren's division, said: "The messages of Captain Planet are even more relevant today. We feel this team can bring the world’s first eco-hero to life in a powerful motion picture that is not only pertinent but entertaining."

For a 90s kid like me, this comes as awesome news. I grew up watching Captain Planet and the Planteers. I enjoyed watching Captain Planet save the Earth from greedy capitalists on a weekly basis. With oil spills, melting ice caps, and wild climate change induced weather; Captain Planet's message is even more relevant today than it was 20 years ago. Can't wait to see this!

‪DREAM Act Story: Elier Lara‬‏

Touching story from Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois.

"This may bring my presidency down, but I will not yield on this."

Huff Po:

"Eric, don't call my bluff. I'm going to the American people on this," the president said, according to both Cantor and another attendee. "This process is confirming what the American people think is the worst about Washington: that everyone is more interested in posturing, political positioning, and protecting their base, than in resolving real problems."

It sounds like Obama isn't going to back down. He's willing to go to the brink in order to get something meaningful passed. It's refreshing to see a Democrat display this amount of chutzpah. Just when I'm just about to give up on the guy he reminds me why I voted for him. This is an incredible gamble though, if we were to go into default we would experience a recession probably worse than the previous one. Obama realizes that if this were to happen that would be the end of his Presidency. But if he's going down he might as well take the Republicans down with him. I imagine this scares the GOP to death, Mitch McConnell admitted as much himself. It's either this or he just doesn't give a damn anymore and has given up on negotiating with the GOP. It's an admirable position though, its not often you see a politician sacrifice his political career for the health of the country. All I can say is I hope it works and the Republicans back down, otherwise its going to get ugly.

BEING PASSED BY: Why Aren't Latino Ballplayers Speaking Out?

BEING PASSED BY: Why Aren't Latino Ballplayers Speaking Out?

RE: Could Nixon Make A Comeback?

Could Nixon Make A Comeback? - The Dish

“I think of what happened to Greece and Rome, and you see what is left — only the pillars,” Nixon concluded somberly. “What has happened, of course, is that the great civilizations of the past, as they have become wealthy, as they have lost their will to live, to improve, they then have become subject to decadence that eventually destroys the civilization. The U.S. is now reaching that period.”

Perhaps Nixon jumped the gun with his conclusion, and failed to take into account a possible Soviet collapse, which occurred a decade and a half after Nixon left office. The collapse of the Soviet Empire bought the United States some more time atop the global hierarchy. But the point Nixon made is even more glaringly obvious now than it was then. With climbing debt, deteriorating infrastructure, a stalled economy, an ineffective public education system, a failed public health system, expensive foreign wars and a gridlocked political process that refuses to address these issues; it is becoming clear that America is in decline. Political leaders refuse to say it, the American public refuses to believe it, but there is no getting around it at this point. It becomes even more glaringly obvious when juxtaposed with rising global powers such as China, India, and Brazil. While those countries have leaders that at least attempt to solve problems and plan for the future, ours focus on short term political gain and personal aggrandizement. I don't hold out much hope for our leaders to grow up, face these challenges, and pull us out of this tailspin. The only question I have at this point is whether we'll go away gracefully like Great Britain, or be destroyed from within like Rome.

Being Held Hostage

Andrew Sullivan writes about the debt ceiling talks going on in Congress:

What you probably cannot do is negotiate with economic equivalent of terrorists. What Cantor and Boehner are doing is essentially letting the world know they have an economic WMD in their possession. And it will go off if you do not give them everything they want, with no negotiation possible. That's the nature of today's GOP. It needs to be destroyed before it can recover.

It's insane that we've reached this point. To have a political party threaten national default if it doesn't get everything it wants is terrorism. It's what hostage takers do. I don't think the American people are taking this seriously enough. Want to know what happens when a country defaults on its debts? Chaos. Just looks at what happened to Latin America in the 80's. Or Mexico. Or Russia. Or Argentina. Bruce Bartlett better explains:  

Republicans are playing not just with fire, but the financial equivalent of nuclear weapons. Perhaps at one time when the federal debt was owned entirely by Americans we could afford to take a chance on debt default because the consequences would only be internal. But today, more than half of the privately held public debt is owed to foreigners; the Chinese alone own more than $1.1 trillion of Treasury securities. Moreover, many countries use Treasury securities as backing for their own currencies. Thus the impact of default would be felt internationally, disrupting finances and economic policies throughout Asia, Europe and Latin America.

Therefore, a potential debt default is far more than a domestic consideration; it is a matter of foreign policy. This is why Secretary of State Clinton and Navy Adm. Mike Mullen have warned that the public debt represents an important threat to national security. As attorney Thomas Geoghegan recently put it, “Where the validity of the debt is concerned, our national security is at stake.”

It's one thing to have a developing country default. It's another thing entirely when the largest, most interconnected economy in the world defaults. Perhaps we're numb to scare tactics. Or we just choose to look away as our bumbling politicians try to disarm a bomb that could kill all of us. I don't know. But luckily there is something Obama can do if Congress fails to act: Go over their heads.  Bartlett explains:

A more radical solution, Plan B, would be to simply disregard the debt limit altogether on constitutional grounds, an idea I suggested in The Fiscal Times on April 29. University of Baltimore law professor Garrett Epps made a similar suggestion in The Atlantic on May 4.

The essence of the argument involves section 4 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, which reads: “The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.”

In my view and that of Prof. Epps, this means that the president would have constitutional authority to take extraordinary measures to protect the public credit and prevent a debt default even if it means disregarding the debt limit, which is statutory law subordinate to the Constitution.

Perhaps we can avoid this crisis after all. I see no other way. Until GOP leaders break and accept compromise on a deal that includes tax hikes AND spending cuts, which has a snowball's chance in hell at this point, there is no other way. Ultimately the responsibility lies with the American people. We elected these children and they aren't doing their jobs. So instead of complaining about it, its time to do something and actually vote them out of office. Until then nothing will get done. 

Portions of Gov. Deal's HB 87 Blocked

Loganville-Grayson, GA Patch

According to the civil action file, section 8 of the bill “authorizes Georgia law enforcement officers to investigate the immigration status of criminal suspects where the officer has probable cause to believe the suspect committed another criminal offense.”   

If an immigrant does not have proper documentation on him, the police officer would have been able to detain him and place him in jail, or report him to the Department of Homeland Security.   

That section was blocked.   

Additionally, section 7, which would penalize anyone “transporting, moving, concealing or harboring illegal aliens,” was blocked. A fine of up to $250,000 would have been imposed. 

You can read the civil suit in its entirety here.    

NPR

 "The defendants wildly exaggerate the scope of the federal crime of harboring under (the law) when they claim that the Plaintiffs are violating federal immigration law by giving rides to their friends and neighbors who are illegal aliens," he said. 

The judge was especially critical of that provision, blasting the state's assertion that federal immigration enforcement is "passive." Thrash noted that federal immigration officers remove more than 900 foreign citizens from the country on an average day. 

He also wrote that the state measure would overstep the enforcement boundaries established by federal law. Thrash noted that there are thousands of illegal immigrants in Georgia because of the "insatiable demand in decades gone by for cheap labor" in the agriculture and construction industries. But he said the federal government gives priority to prosecuting and removing illegal immigrants who have committed crimes.

 The entire bill, which goes into effect on July 1, hasn't been blocked just these portions. The section of the bill that makes it a felony to provide false information on a job application will still go into effect. Even still this is very positive news. I'm proud of U.S. District Judge Thomas Thrash Jr. for doing what is right and just. There still is a long road ahead however. If you want to help overturn HB 87 there will be protests on July 1st and 2nd. Not perfect, but I can't deny that this is great news for immigrants in the state of Georgia.

                                                                                                                                                

Cutting Off the Nose to Smite the Face

Crop Losses Could Top $1B - GPB

An agriculture industry group estimates a shortage of migrant labor may wind up costing Georgia fruit and vegetable farmers $300 million in crop losses. Officials worry the total economic impact will be even greater if crops from the next harvest are lost. 

The Georgia Agribusiness Council estimates the total loss stemming from spoiled and unpicked produce to be close to $1 billion.

Georgia is paying a high price for the near-sighted bigotry of its legislators. While the Republicans representing the suburbs around Atlanta and Augusta rode the immigrant hate-train long enough to pass House Bill 87, they completely ignored the engine that drives much of Georgia's economy: agriculture. Anyone who has ever driven through the state of Georgia knows that agriculture dominates much of the state. Being a resident of Georgia since 1998 I've learned this. Peanuts, Pecans, Peaches, Cotton, Timber, and Poultry are multi-million dollar industries in this state. For better or for worse, all of these industries are reliant on cheap immigrant labor; labor that is rapidly fleeing the state. Quickly realizing the bind he's created for farmers, Governor Nathan Deal is scrambling for solutions. He's ordered that probationers be sent out into the fields to pick crops; a plan that has failed miserably.

I'll never understand why our beloved legislature decided to pursue such an economically crippling bill during a time where Georgia faces 10% unemployment. Then again this is a state where in the year 2011, you still can't buy a can of beer or a bottle of wine on Sundays. It's the South, where the people have more disconnects than AT&T. I've grown accustomed to the backwardness of its politics. But when there's an issue like this that affects me directly, it gets irritating. As a result of this bill immigrants will flee the state, food prices will rise, farmers will struggle, and investment will look elsewhere, probably to more friendly states such as Florida. A state and region that has worked hard to escape its dark racial past is once again being dragged back into the darkness. It's up to the good people of Georgia, Alabama, Arizona and the rest of the United States to once again stand up for what's right, and force our leaders to do the right thing. Immigrants are people not aliens, and its time we start treating them like that.

Chinese Awakening?

Max Fisher - The Atlantic

Last week, riots broke out in Guangdong province, the country's most populous as well as its industrial base. Coastal, ethnic Han, and economically essential, Guangdong province matters for China. In the violence end ensuing crackdown, protesters burned out cars, ransacked shops, and rained bricks on police. CNN's Eunice Yoon, arriving here not long after the protesters, wrote, "for the first time since I started reporting in China years ago, workers approached us unfazed by our cameras. They were unafraid to vent their grievances to foreign TV journalists even as the police looked on." Police soon commanded her to leave.

What has worried me for sometime now is the example that China has set for the world. The fact that China has achieved extraordinary economic growth over the past thirty years while still maintaining an autocratic system has fascinated the world. Many columnists have even expressed envy at this model and have pondered why the American political system can't achieve the focus of the Chinese political system. I've always felt uneasy about these arguments because it undermines the virtue of democracy and fails to paint a complete picture. As an outsider looking in its easy to point to the cold, technocratic, one-party system that has successfully achieved break-neck economic growth and say it works. China indeed should be lauded for recovering from the backwardness under Mao to become the superpower they are today. They've transformed from a largely peasant agrarian society to a modern capitalist juggernaut in little over 50 years. 


But what doesn't get talked about is the fact that China leads the world in executions by a wide margin. Human rights abuses? Ignored. Lack of Labor standards? Overlooked even praised in some circles. Persecution of ethnic minorities such as Tibetans and Uighurs? Barely talked about. Total disregard for the environment? Not even on the radar. Outside of Fareed Zakaria, no one in the mainstream media brings up these issues. Only those that pay close attention know that China is basically recolonizing Africa. The American political system has its long list of faults, I'm not even going to go there, but its problems pale in comparison to China's. I would wager that there isn't a single American, Briton, German, Frenchman, or Canadian in their right minds that would trade their lives for that of a Chinese. 


It was widely believed that the acquiescence of the Chinese population was essentially bought in exchange for economic growth. But that assumption is quickly being debunked. Chinese citizens are increasingly taking to the streets to air out their grievances in the face of overwhelming force. It isn't clear how much the Arab Spring has influenced this "Chinese Summer"; but you'd have to be blind not to the connection. The Chinese government was afraid of this which is why it increased its electronic monitoring recently. Will this lead to meaningful political reforms or will it lead to another Tiananmen Square? No one knows. But its worth keeping an eye on going forward.

Equality At Last!

How New York Legalized Gay Marriage

With the stroke of a pen just before midnight on Friday, Governor Andrew Cuomo legalized gay marriage in New York, making the state the sixth and by far the largest to have a same-sex marriage law on the books. 

The victory is all the more remarkable because it comes just two years after gay marriage supporters badly miscalculated their support in the same chamber, watching their same-sex marriage bill go down by a 24-to-38 margin after a dramatic floor debate.

Bravo New York! New York becomes the largest state in the United States to pass a gay marriage bill. This is a seminal moment for LGBTQ rights in America and worldwide. This has been a long time coming for one of America's largest gay communities. After it was passed celebrations erupted in the streets of New York City. Including at the Stonewall Inn in Greenwich Village, an important landmark for the gay rights movement.

Repeating History

Pew Research: Record Support For Afghanistan Troop Withdrawl

For the first time since Pew Research began asking the question in 2008, a majority (56 percent) now say they want the U.S. to remove American troops from Afghanistan "as soon as possible," while 39 percent say they they want to leave troops "until the situation has stabilized." That result represents a reversal since last year, when leaving the troops in place was preferred by a majority of 53 percent to 40 percent.

With news that President Obama will be addressing the nation on Wednesday night about Afghanistan there is speculation out there that a troop withdrawal could be announced. Last week it was reported that the US State Department is talking directly with the Taliban, possibly seeking a peace deal. The 10 year old war is becoming increasingly unpopular with the American public. At best the war has become a stalemate, at worst a quagmire. The death of Osama Bin Laden last month has given the Obama Administration sufficient political cover to start discussing an accelerated drawdown of troops from Afghanistan. As reported in the Bob Woodward book Obama's Wars, Obama wants to withdraw from Afghanistan by the time he leaves office. He's keenly aware of what the Vietnam War did to Lyndon Johnson's legacy and desperately wants to avoid that same fate. There are certain factions within his administration, most notably the Pentagon and State Department, that are weary of a withdrawal. But with the retirement of Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense and the pending departure of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State if Obama wins a second term; institutional resistance to a withdrawal won't nearly be as strong. 


My best guess is that we'll see a Vietnam-like peace deal that includes a withdrawal of a majority of NATO troops from the country. The moderate factions of the Taliban will allowed to participate in government in exchange for disarmament. I think we will still keep certain military bases open such as Bagram in order to keep an eye on neighboring Pakistan and for strategic reasons. I'd imagine that the CIA will also continue to have a large presence in the country so that the U.S. can continue to conduct Drone attacks along the border region. But of course convincing the Taliban to accept a peace deal can be a tall task. They've rejected previous overtures by the U.S. government for peace talks. It's hard for me to imagine that they would accept any deal where foreign troops remain in the country. My gut feeling on this is that by 2016 there won't be any U.S. troops in Afghanistan.

Amish Man Arrested For Sexting

A sign of the Apocalypse?

HuffPo:

William Yoder arrived to a Milford, Indiana restaurant via horse and buggy and was arrested for sending nearly 600 sexts, nude photos and explicit videos to the girl he planned to meet, per ABC News.

Do Ideas Really Matter Anymore?

I first heard about this story last night. I'm not sure if I'm refusing to believe that it happened, or wrestling with a gnawing feeling that I shouldn't be surprised at all.

I have a hard time believing it because, as this Atlantic online piece suggestions, Professor Juan Cole was never a serious threat to the Bush Administration. Now, let me admit that his book Engaging the Middle East is a favorite of mine, and I don't read his blog, Informed Comment, nearly enough. But public intellectuals and professors haven't had a serious impact on political life in the United States in far too long. Which is precisely the problem with our culture today.

People like Juan Cole, or before him Howard Zinn (as just one example), are largely marginalized. I do remember on the eve of the Iraq War watching Professor Zinn deplore the idea of invading Iraq, the very night Baghdad was first being attacked. I had the sense that, while this debate was on PBS, and he was being allowed to say what he wanted, that in the end it really didn't matter. The war was already starting.

When was the last time you saw someone like Noam Chomsky on television? A conservative voice like Andrew Bacevich gets on every once in a while, but not nearly enough. Our culture is too tied to "liberal" and "conservative" ideas that make sense in Washington, that require only minuscule understanding so that they make easy, ready to dispense talking points. The Bush Administration, worried about a professor? Why, when being a public intellectual today is so easily dismissed?

Richmond Fed Flys the Rainbow Flag, Religious Right Jumps the Shark

Richmond Times-Dispatch

In a letter to Richmond Fed President Jeffrey M. Lacker, Marshall says the homosexual behavior "celebrated" by the bank "undermines the American economy." 

"What does flying the homosexual flag, or any other similar display, have to do with your central banking mission under the Federal Reserve Act passed by Congress?" writes Marshall, one of the General Assembly's most conservative members.

Flying a Gay Pride flag over the Richmond Federal Reserve undermines the American economy? I hate to abuse the Picard facepalm but this was just too appropriate:

Pat Robertson -- pro-legalization?

A group of world leaders that included former UN secretary-general Kofi Annan and former chairman of the Fed Paul Volcker, called for a shift in the way the world approaches illegal drugs. It's the largest collection of world leaders to call for decriminalization to date. But perhaps the most interesting part of the article is this quote:

Yahoo! News

Christian talk show host Pat Robertson caused a stir in December when he endorsed on "The 700 Club" faith-based rehabilitation programs instead of jail time for drug use, and even appeared to support the legalization of marijuana. "I'm not exactly for the use of drugs, don't get me wrong," he said. "I just believe that criminalizing marijuana, criminalizing the possession of a few ounces of pot--that kind of thing--it's costing us a fortune and it's ruining young people."

Now I know we're at the end of days. Pat Robertson is pro-decriminalization? Did someone sneak him a pot brownie by accident? Perhaps the last key demographic in support of the War on Drugs has been evangelical Christians. Despite's Robertson's age his opinion carries a great deal of weight among evangelicals. It's one thing to have your run-of-the-mill hippies and libertarians criticizing the War on Drugs, it's another thing entirely to have right-wing evangelicals start criticizing it. I think its safe to say now that the tide is turning. With prisons overflowing, governments struggling to make payroll, and public opinion coming around; full-scale reform on this issue should happen on a national level within the next 10 years.

Not Good News for Obama or America

The economy just isn't improving like the President would like.

This certainly isn't good news for Presient Obama's re-election chances. If the economy isn't better by next November, 2012, he'll be in serious trouble.

Late 2008 saw considerable talk among liberals about that election being the newest "realignment" election, in the sense that American politics were making a fundamental shift from one political wing to the other. Plenty of examples abound, with historians still debating the merits of several of them being realignments (for a good discussion, look here). But that talk, it appears, was premature.

Then again, President Reagan was in trouble after 1982, and President Clinton was dead meat in January 1995. So, all one can say is that we have a very, very long election season ahead of us.

Snakes on a Train

CNN

Vietnamese authorities are on alert for animal smugglers after four bags of deadly snakes were found on a train from Ho Chi Minh City to Hanoi, according to local press reports. 

The bags contained an undetermined number of snakes including some king cobras, the on-line news service VnExpress reported.

Looks like the good people of Vietnam beat us to a sequel. Reports that Samuel L. Jackson was on that train are unconfirmed at this point...

Westboro Baptist Church vs. the KKK

Counter-protesters confront Westboro Baptist Church at Arlington - CNN.com

Among those counter-protesting at the cemetery's main entrance: About 10 members of a group that claims to be a branch of the Ku Klux Klan from Virginia called the Knights of the Southern Cross. They were cordoned off separately in a nearby area, but drew little attention as they gave out small American flags behind a banner that read "POW-MIA."

 This is just one of those times where you just stay out of it. When the KKK is on the side of common decency then you know you've fallen too deep into the rabbit hole.

Sudan On the Brink

Al Jazeera English

New satellite images provide evidence that northern Sudanese troops have committed war crimes, including ethnic cleansing, in the contested border town of Abyei where the forces took over more than a week ago, according to an advocacy group. 

The Satellite Sentinel Project said in a statement on Sunday that satellite images by DigitalGlobe show that the Sudanese army burned about one-third of all civilian buildings in the north-south border town, used disproportionate force and indiscriminately targeted civilians.

For those that don't know much about Sudan, ever since gaining independence in 1956 Sudan has fought two bloody civil wars between the largely Arab north Sudan and the African south Sudan. The combined death toll from these wars is estimated to be around 2.5 million people (which doesn't even include the genocide in Darfur). Well in 2005 the two sides agreed to a peace deal that would allow Southern Sudan to vote for its independence from Sudan. In January they held that referendum in which a whopping 98.83% of the population voted for independence. At the time Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir said he accepted these results and would allow the succession to take place. Providing an important backdrop to the conflict is the fact that 85% of Sudan's petroleum reserves are located in South Sudan. 


That's where the town of Aybei comes in. Aybei is a province on the border between Sudan and South Sudan, known largely for its large oil reserves. It once accounted for a quarter of Sudan's petroleum reserves, but have since declined. The Greater Nile Oil Pipeline, which transports oil to the Red Sea, also runs through Aybei. Compounding things Aybei is extraordinarily fertile and is a favored spot among local livestock herders. Given the maniacal nature of Omar al-Bashir, the history between the North and South, and the resources at stake in Aybei, it's no wonder they are on the brink of war once again. For a country once known as the "breadbasket of Africa" with large oil reserves, it's a shame that Sudan can't seem to find peace. If it did, the sky would be the limit.