Props for the Prez

I'm going to give credit where credit is due, and that includes President Obama.

At a summit of North American leaders, Obama slammed critics of his approach to the recent events in Honduras.

"The same critics who say the US has not intervened in Honduras are the same people who say we are always intervening and Yankees need to get out of Latin America," he said, accusing such opponents of "hypocrisy."

"You can't have it both ways,"

That is one of the most sensible things that has been said regarding Latin America in a long time. Even Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper defended Obama's approach:

"The United States is accused of meddling except when it's accused of not meddling," Harper said, praising the US "multilateral" role in efforts to reverse the coup and ease the Honduran crisis.

It is noticeable that Administration calls for Zelaya's restoration to power have been somewhat muted as of late, which I think is a good thing. From what I understand, Zelaya was a Chavez wannabe, and was in the process of suspending the Honduran constitution and having himself declared dictator for life, Venezuelan-style. The country has not been taken over by the army, and the National Congress is still in power, headed by Zelaya's lawfully elected successor. This is obviously not your typical banana-republic coup, and it is wise for the United States to maintain its distance.

Tiananemen Square

Tomorrow (June 4th) is the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre. To re-cap, sensing the feelings of deep, radical change that were sweeping the Communist world in 1989, some 100,000 Chinese students gathered in Tiananmen Square in April of 1989, protesting for the continuation of market and political reforms that had been taking place under the leadership of Hu Yaobang, a pro-market, pro-democracy official who had just died. The protests widened across the country, but the gathering in Beijing captured world attention.

The Chinese government declared martial law, and made several attempts to send troops into the square, all of them met with resistance by both the students and the Beijing populace. Some of the most powerful images from Tiananmen Square include the Chinese goddess of democracy statue, and, of course, the lone man standing against the line of tanks. The video of him, repeatedly moving to line himself up with the tanks as they tried to drive around him is absolutely riveting. Finally, on the night of June 3-4, armored personnel carriers and armed troops surrounded and entered the square, firing and killing indiscriminately.

The estimate of the number of those killed is varied, as one might expect. The official Chinese government number is a paltry 241. More reliable estimates place the death toll any where from 1000 to 7000. The actual number, like the fate of that lone man, will never be known. However, we should bear in mind, as this article by Claudia Rosett states, "the high-end estimate of the number killed in the Tiananmen uprising is dwarfed many times over by the millions of Chinese who died under the horrific communist experiment of Chairman Mao: forcibly collectivized, rusticated, starved, executed outright or dispatched to the torments of China's prison camps, the laogai."

Some of the reactions to the massacre have been disturbing. Sen. Dianne Feinstein self-righteously compared the massacre to the shootings of 4 students at Kent State in 1970, a statement which is perhaps one of the most egregious examples of moral equivalency.Charles Freeman, who was recently tapped as President Obama's head of the National Council of Intelligence (nomination subsequently withdrawn), said in 2006 that the" truly unforgivable mistake" the Chinese authorities made at Tiananmen was not the brutal massacre of peaceful pro-democracy demonstrators, but rather "the failure to intervene on a timely basis to nip the demonstrations in the bud." The Chinese communists were not "rash," but rather "overly cautious." That's right--you're overly cautious if you shoot down peaceful demonstrators.

Recently Secretary of State Clinton went out of her way to let China know that the United States will not let human rights concerns hinder our cooperation with China. Maybe that's how diplomacy is supposed to work, maybe that's the kind of treacle that the State Department has to spit out in order for the world to keep turning. I hope not. What happened 20 years ago, where an oppressed populace stood up for democracy and freedom, is too important to forget.

Terminology

I ran across this over at small dead animals, a Canadian blog. It highlights the disturbing terminologies used by the MSM:

An Islamic thug screaming "death to Jews" in the streets of Sweden is a "youth" or an "activist". ('Cause some folks want us to be like Sweden.)

An Islamic thug screaming "death to Jews" from a podium at the United Nations is a "conservative". (I thought everyone loves us now.)

Sure--makes perfect sense to me.



NOT.

A long 4 years?

I wasn't going to post something new on politics today. I was even going to let the whole "Special Olympics" thing go--it was a stupid gaffe, but I don't think anyone believes that Obama is mean to cripples.

It is a question of balance, though. I use the word hypocrisy a lot, and I've come to realize that maybe that isn't what I'm getting angry about. There is hypocrisy everywhere, everyday, in everyone; it's part of our humanity, part of what makes us human.

Balance is a lot closer to what I'm trying to capture. Imagine if Bush had made the same comment that Obama did on Leno; how do you think the press would have reacted, and more importantly, for HOW LONG? Remember, this is the Hope and Change guy we are talking about; he was so much smarter and better than the others, so well-spoken. He was going to bring a fresh new face to our relations with our international friends and enemies.

The Anchoress says it best:

Can you IMAGINE what the press and the Dems would have done with the Irish PM Teleprompter gaffe (the press has helpfully embargoed the video, so Obama doesn’t have to see it playing 24/7, as Bush would have - had Bush so gaffed). Can you IMAGINE what the press and the Dems would have done if Bush had given the Prime Minister of Great Britain a lousy pack of 50 “Classic” DVD’s that didn’t work in the UK?

Yeah, I know--she's just an overweight, self-centered nag. Read the article--see what she has to say, and maybe try not to worry about her appearance.
I just heard about the region code gaffe with the British Prime Minister's DVD "gift:"

While not exactly a film buff, Gordon Brown was touched when Barack Obama gave him a set of 25 classic American movies – including Psycho, starring Anthony Perkins - on his recent visit to Washington.

Alas, when the PM settled down to begin watching them the other night, he found there was a problem.

The films only worked in DVD players made in North America and the words "wrong region" came up on his screen...

Is this really the guy everybody voted for?

Alabama vs. Europe

Two recent observations came out that I find interesting in their juxtaposition.

First, as part of a study to examine American ideas about Islam, a college student dressed in a black abaya traveled to Arab, Alabama (yeah--never heard of it either) to see how the local townspeople would react to her attire. "I expected people to say, 'What is this terrorist doing here? We don't want your kind here,' " said Hailey Woldt, a 22-year-old blue-eyed Catholic, recalling her anticipation before stepping into a local barbecue joint. "I thought I wouldn't even be served."

Instead, Woldt’s experiment in social anthropology opened her own eyes. Apart from the initial glances reserved for any outsider who might venture through a small-town restaurant’s doors, her experience was a pleasant one.

Maybe she should be studying American prejudices about the South instead. You know how stupid and backwards us rednecks can be, staring slack-jawed at the terrorist Arab lady. One native Alabaman commenter noted that he’d feel safer in Birmingham in a turban than in San Francisco in a Bush/Cheney t-shirt.

The other study, commissioned by the Anti-Defamation League is a little more scientific and perhaps more disturbing. The ADL conducted a poll, which included interviews with 3,500 people - 500 each in Austria, Britain, France, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Spain.

They found that 33% of Europeans blame Jews for the global economic meltdown. That's one-third to us crackers who don't unnerstan addin' and minusin' and 'rithametic.

In Spain, 74 percent of those asked say they feel it is "probably true" that Jews hold too much sway over the global financial markets. Nearly two-thirds of Spanish respondents said Jews were more loyal to Israel than they were to their home countries.

I thought those Europeans were supposed to be so much more enlightened than us, especially us Southern good ol' boys.

I guess you don't have to go all the way to Alabama to find religious prejudice.

Size 10 WMD--UPDATED

This clown is being hailed as a "hero" by many in the Arab world, after chucking his shoes at President Bush at a press conference in Baghdad.

"Thanks be to God, Muntazer's act fills Iraqi hearts with pride," his brother, Udai al-Zaidi, told Reuters Television.

"This was a spontaneous action by an Iraqi citizen who was showing his dismay at seeing the president of the country which is occupying our nation," said Liwaa Sumeissim from the anti-American Sadr movement.

According to one report, Al-Baghdadiya television played endless patriotic music, with Zaidi's face plastered across the screen.

Among those leaping up to support al-Zaidi was Khalil al-Dulaimi, Saddam's former lawyer, who said he was forming a team to defend the journalist and that around 200 lawyers, including Americans, had offered their services for free.

I found this comment from a Canadian named Allen King over on the Al Jazeera English site: "Al-zaidi's act will long be remembered in history, same as when an unarmed student stood before a tank in Tianaman Square in Bejing."

Some people have a different view of what heroic really means. No matter what you may think of Bush, there is a vast difference between a lone man facing down a tank and this journalist "expressing" himself.

Something tells me--and it's probably just a silly hunch--that for some strange reason, Manolo Boy (or how about Buster Brown? al-Thom McCann?) never contemplated tossing his Blahniks at the former leader of Iraq; I wonder why? I wonder how many lawyers would have rushed to aid his defense if he had thrown his shoes at Saddam.

Most likely, he would not have needed a lawyer at all. Just someone from forensics to ID his remains.

UPDATE (12/17/2008, 4:47 PM): I ran across this quote that someone left as a comment on another blog:

The reporter knows deep down that he can throw his shoe at Bush only because of Bush and it shames him. He can’t forgive Bush for that.

I thought that was another interesting take on the situation.

Burning churches and Bush and the Muslims

A few unrelated items of interest:

First, Sarah Palin's church in Wasila was set on fire by an arsonist Friday night. There were several people in the church at the time, including two small children. It is pure speculation at this point to assign motives for the fire--whether it was related to the church's stand on homosexuality for example, or Palin's politics, or some other reason. I will predict that not much will be made of this event by the mainstream press. I can almost guarantee that if the fire had been set at someone else's church, especially while children were present, the outcry would be deafening.


Second, I am not (despite howls from some to the contrary) Geroge Bush's greatest fan. I think much of how the Iraq war was handled, especially after the invasion, was bungling and chaotic, to say the least. Ultimately, there has been a remarkable turnaround, and the country is a much better place than it was in 2001, or for that matter in 2006.

I ran across this interesting post last night. The title itself drew my attention: "Rescuing 50 Million People From Brutal Regimes Has Given Bush a Bad Name With Muslims." Indeed, the article quotes this AP story about the laundry list of horrors that Bush is responsible for:

The U.S. image globally has taken a deep hit during President George W. Bush's two terms in office, primarily because of opposition to the U.S. invasion of Iraq, harsh interrogation of prisoners, the indefinite detention of terrorist suspects at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, and mistreatment of inmates at the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

(emphasis added)
Just above this quote is an embedded video with the label "Warning: very graphic" attached to it. Watch it carefully and with that warning in mind, but do watch it, please. These are the people that Bush freed the Iraqis from. Exactly how does something like Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo even compare?

I hope Obama can help change this impression that the Muslim world has of us. But this is not strictly Bush's fault; it is far more complex and far deeper than that. A simple change of face at the White House, even with "Hussein" as a middle name, is not going to do it. No better example of this can be found than Al-Qaida's al-Zawahri referring to Obama as a "house negro" (see my post November 19th).

This story also from the AP via the Knoxville News Sentinel begins this way:

President-elect Barack Obama, relatively young and inexperienced, is facing a rapidly growing list of monumental challenges as he prepares to take the reins of a nation in turmoil.

Funny how just a few weeks ago, "young and inexperienced" was actually "fresh and dynamic."

An Enlightened Electorate, and a New Respect

Two stories here:

First, an interesting Zogby poll of Obama voters. In this poll, they didn't seem, well, very knowledgable. More than half (way more than half) could not identify which party controlled Congress. Seventy-two percent did not know that Biden had quit a previous campaign over charges of plagiarism. Almost 90% did not know about Obama's stance on the coal industry.

They were pretty informed on Sarah Palin, though. Most were convinced (falsely) that Palin said she could see Russia from her window. And over 90% knew that she had a pregnant teenage daughter.

This is not about how dumb Obama voters are; there are obviously Obama voters out there who are much more informed about our government (although the majority of this sample were high-school and college grads). And there were plenty of examples of McCain supporters during the campaign who were most likely dropped on their heads in the delivery room. It's about the meme that by and large, Obama voters were somehow hipper and smarter than those racist Neanderthals who voted for the other guy. The idea that Obama voters are more focused on the "real issues" is maybe not so true after all.

Second, the #2 guy at Al Qaeda (vice-president? deputy CEO? assistant to the regional manager?) used a racial epithet in a message to President-elect Obama, referring to him (along with secretaries of state Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice) as "house negroes."

And you thought we were going to be respected now . . . awwww . . .

Hypocrisy, and other ills

Check out this piece about green hypocrisy, perhaps the most potent form of hypocrisy out there right now. When the doomsayers start acting like it really is the end of the world, then perhaps I will have an easier time of believing them. It's not about whether global warming is occurring or not (see my previous post about this), but about how to address the problem, and whether radical solutions are necessary. It really bugs me to have these idiots preach at me, when they obviously aren't willing to make the sacrifices that they want the rest of us to make. I really liked the fact that Ms. Portman has a line of vegan footwear.

Vegan footwear--who knew?

I also liked this one about the UN Food Summit in Rome--that's Rome, not Zimbabwe, or Darfur, or Myanmar. Nice to see these guys are really cutting back this year.

Speaking of Myanmar, the UN also recently sent 200,000 condoms to the victims of the cyclone. A total of 218 400 condoms would be delivered, UNFPA aid advisor Chaiyos Kunanusont said.

"We don't want regular use of contraception disrupted. An emergency usually damages the health system, so people don't have access to condoms and contraceptives," said Chaiyos. 'Cause that's the first thing on your mind when your paddling through the flood waters, trying to keep your self afloat--I hope I can find some condoms REAL SOON.

I just read that the US Navy has now withdrawn a fleet of ships carrying REAL aid to the citizens of that country, after making numerous attempts to land there.

Sigh. Exactly what is the function of the UN again?

The Great Satan

The ongoing disaster in Myanmar from Cylone Nargis is this week compounded by the earthquake disaster in China. I haven't seen anyone directly blaming Bush for either disaster (at least, not yet), but perhaps the folks at DailyKos will oblige.

So, there is this article about disaster relief that I found to be well-written: http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/janetalbrechtsen/index.php/theaustralian/comments/credit_where_its_due1

THERE is a certain familiarity to the concomitant series of actions and reactions when disaster strikes in the world. The US stands ready, willing and able to offer assistance. It is often the first country to send in millions of dollars, navy strike groups loaded with food and medical supplies, and transport planes, helicopters and floating hospitals to help those devastated by natural disaster.

Then, just as swift and with equal predictability, those wedded to the Great Satan view of the US begin to carp, drawing on a potent mixture of cynicism and conspiracy theories to criticise the last remaining superpower. When the US keeps doing so much of the heavy lifting to alleviate suffering, you'd figure that the anti-Americans might eventually revise their view of the US. But they never do. And coming under constant attack even when helping others, you'd figure that Americans would eventually draw the curtains on world crises. But they haven't. At least not yet.

So it was last week. The US stood ready to help the cyclone-ravaged Burmese people. It did not matter that Burma's ruling junta was no friend of the Americans. With more than 100,000 people feared dead and many more hundreds of thousands left destitute, US Air Force cargo planes loaded with supplies and personnel started arriving in nearby Thailand to begin humanitarian operations in Burma. . . . The resentment that comes from needing the military and economic might of the US translated into the most absurd criticism. Jan Egeland, the former UN boss of humanitarian affairs, cavilled about the stinginess of certain Western nations. His eye was on the US. Former British minister Claire Short was equally miffed, describing the initiative by the US and other countries as "yet another attempt to undermine the UN", which was, according to her, the "only body that has the moral authority" to help.

I love moral authority as much as the next guy, but the UN's moral authority is a mighty hard sell given that the UN club includes the most odious regimes in the world, such as Burma. And notice how the UN's moral authority did not quickly translate into helicopters laden with food and water?

My thoughts exactly. What's left underreported is that one of Myanmar's best friends (BFF4ever!) is ---- CHINA! Yeah, they just got hammered by the quake, but the Chinese haven't exactly been using their leverage in the region and as an ally to pressure the Burmese military to let aid into the country. Yes--the same China that is THE stumbling block to a resolution to the evil situation in Darfur.

And they call us the Great Satan.