Analyzing Egypt through a Western Lens

One of the best DU professors I took classes from has an op-ed about Egypt's coup, which has been widely celebrated by some Westerners even though it sets an extremely dangerous precedent for democracy development in the Middle East. I recommend reading the whole piece in the Christian Science Monitor. Money quotes below:

The modernization experience of the Arab-Islamic world has been qualitatively different from the Western one. For complex reasons rooted in the failures of the post-colonial state, modernization has produced strong religious-based opposition movements and weak secular groups in deeply polarized societies....As many had predicted, the Brotherhood’s first attempt at exercising power highlighted its incompetence. Morsi made one bad decision after another and his party’s popularity plummeted. The Brotherhood was headed for certain defeat in the coming parliamentary elections. This would likely have led to a period of soul-searching and internal debate. A more inclusive and moderate offshoot might have emerged. Now, we will never know....What Western liberals fail to appreciate is that integrating Islamists into formal politics is an essential part of the struggle for democracy in the Arab-Islamic world. The prospects of this happening have now been dealt a serious blow. The lesson that Islamists will learn is that respecting the rules of democracy do not matter, because when they win elections, their opponents do not respect the same rules. It is now likely that a process of radicalization will poison the politics of Egypt and the broader Islamic world for years to come.

Syrian Intervention

I'm sharing a post about why US intervention in Syria is, more likely than not, a horrible idea. It was written by a professor of mine who taught a great class on the major issues in international security. 

The article is here.

The Power of Propaganda

I was recently visiting with a friend who is smart, wise, successful, and much older than me. We were just starting our day together and as a topic of discussion I shared my class lineup at the University of Denver this fall (I’m an MA candidate at the Josef Korbel School). One of the classes I am taking there this fall is called modern Islamic political thought.

Thinking my friend was about to further the discussion of Islamic political thought I listened intently to the words that came out of my friend’s mouth. “Egypt’s looking for a new Islamic leader. I say let’s give him ours.”

I might have looked like a deer caught in the headlights for a second while I took these words in, realizing my friend truly wasn’t joking. And then I held a private funeral in my head for the intelligent conversation that was clearly not going to happen.

I played dumb. “I don’t get it,” I said. “What do you mean?”

“Well, that’s a political thought,” my friend said.

I was thinking that to call it a political thought is to give it more merit than it’s due. “What’s a political thought?” I asked.

“That we should give Egypt our Muslim leader,” my friend responded.

“Obama is not a Muslim.” I tried to say this as calmly as possible.

“Oh, he’s not?” My friend responded.

“No, he’s not. And for you to call that idea a political thought isn’t right. It’s absolutely garbage.”

My friend looked taken aback. My stare was intense and I could feel my pulse rise as I waited for a response, but there was none. That was the end of our political discussion for the day. But for the rest of the afternoon I thought about our conversation and I was embarrassed over and over again for my friend. That my friend could believe such a lie, such propaganda, was sickening.

It was my first personal experience with someone who has truly been fed a political lie enough times that in their head the lie has found a permanent home as a supposed truth. This particular lie is often presented as a legitimate concern by right-wing media outlets. On Fox News someone might joke about it, but no one is reprimanded for it, no one speaks up and says, “We are better than that.”

Yesterday’s conversation exhibited the power of this propaganda machine. The lie starts with one person and is then adopted by a cabal, whose only interest is their own, whether it be the political downfall of a certain politician or a desire to stay rich, powerful, and barely taxed, or a combination of these. These people are powerful enough to own TV stations, radio networks, whole news organizations, and they use these assets as hugely powerful tools to present myths and rumors as fact while simultaneously hiding the truth from our eyes. (See Roger Ailes and Donald Trump.) Gradually, the lie spreads across the audience, who might have even dismissed it as ridiculous the first time they heard it or read it (I hope my friend did at least that). But the saturation and the never-ceasing tide of money coming from the wealthiest Americans has proved itself strong enough to hold hostage the intellectual and independent-thinking abilities of many Americans. (See the continuing belief by some that Obama isn’t American or that Obama is a Muslim.)

One of the more popular lies among the Right (although, to clarify, it’s not a lie for them) is to compare the Obama administration to that of the Third Reich. Yes, the same propaganda machine that convinced my friend that Obama is a Muslim, would also have you believe Obama harbors a secret agenda of spreading national socialism across America.

Nothing about Obama’s policies has ever evoked, for me, a whisper of Nazi Germany. In fact, it was the conversation with my friend that had me contemplating many a table conversation in 1930s Germany, when it might have been shared by a friend or family member that they had joined the Nazi party to the absolute dismay of anyone at the table who had a brain. I am not calling anyone a Nazi here. If you want to see that, watch a week of Fox News and you’ll see someone hint, at least once, that an Obama policy is strikingly familiar to one of Hitler’s policies. No, I am referencing the power of propaganda. The Nazis certainly mastered it and both the Right and the Left have adopted some of their strategies. But now, at this point in America’s history, I think it’s clear that the Right’s propaganda machine is churning out a lot of lies and doing whatever it takes to shift the mantle of power back to their side by spreading fear and angst that we have a president who is not American, but also a president who is a secretive Muslim who is colluding with Islamic nations across the world in order to favor that religion’s interests.

I am in awe of the propaganda machine and its ability to convince smart people that they most adopt such vacuous ideas. Next time, don’t consume the lies. Instead, try to do the thinking yourself. 

Watch To The End

The Daily Show
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

Brilliant.

The 20th Debate

I'm not watching every minute of this debate. I gave up on them a long time ago, but I do read Sullivan's live blog of the events. This bit from his reaction about the Iran issue is great:

 

9.40 pm. Santorum really does seem to be implying that Obama has some kind of secret agenda vis-a-vis Iran. And he pretty obviously would launch a massive war on Iran. We're hearing the kind of language we heard after 9/11. Exactly the same language; exactly the same arguments; exactly the same paranoia.

There seems to be no memory of the Iraq war at all. It never happened. There was no error. There is nothing to explain. And yet they do not seem to realize that that catastrophic war is the reason Barack Obama is president. It's like an etch-a-sketch party. Shake it one election cycle - and the past disappears completely!

Worries About Iran

John Mueller has a good comment on Iran published on The Guardian's website on February 16. For all those people getting their panties in a bunch about Iran's nuclear program, this is a good read. So much of the talk about Iran is exactly like the talk about Iraq in 2002 and 2003. Have we forgotten how that turned out for us and thousands of Iraqi people? Never get involved in a land war in Asia. Haven't all the saber-rattlers in the US seen The Princess Bride:

Money quotes:

Iran would most likely "use" any nuclear capacity in the same way all other nuclear states have: for prestige (or ego‑stoking) and to deter real or perceived threats. Historical experience strongly suggests that new nuclear countries, even ones that once seemed hugely threatening, like communist China in the 1960s, are content to use their weapons for such purposes. 

Indeed, as strategist (and Nobel laureate) Thomas Schelling suggests, deterrence is about the only value the weapons might have for Iran. Such devices, he points out, "would be too precious to give away or to sell" and "too precious to waste killing people" when they could make other countries "hesitant to consider military action".

...

There is also an uncomfortable truth. If Iran wants to develop a nuclear weapon, the only way it can be effectively stopped is invasion and occupation, an undertaking that would make America's costly war in Iraq look like child's play. Indeed, because it can credibly threaten invaders with another and worse Iraq, Iran scarcely needs nuclear weapons to deter invasion. This fact might eventually dawn on its leaders.

Air strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities might temporarily set them back, but the country's most likely response would be to launch a truly dedicated effort to obtain a bomb, as Iraq's nuclear weapons budget was increased twenty-five-fold after its facilities were bombed by Israel in 1981. Moreover, Iran might well respond by seeking to make life markedly more difficult for US and Nato forces in neighbouring Afghanistan.

The Next 13 Days

I won't have much of a life for the next thirteen days, but I may find some things to share on here during research for my two final papers. One of those papers is on Anwar al-Awlaki, the American citizen who was targeted and killed in Yemen on September 30, 2011. He is featured prominently in a book called Jihad Joe: Americans Who Go To War In The Name Of Islam, by J.M. Berger, that I just read this weekend and I just wanted to quote from a CNN article he cited in the book. To give you some context, Awlaki used to live in California and this is a conversation he had about possibly returning to California:

“He said, “I’m going back to Virginia, and shortly after that, I’ll be going to Yemen.” And I said, “Well, I do hope you’ll be coming back to San Diego soon.” And he says, “No, I don’t be coming back. And in a little while, you’ll understand why.”

To give you some more context, this happened not too long before 9/11. Awlaki is suspected of having direct contact with two of the hijackers while in California and later on in Virginia. So the "And in a little while, you'll understand why" just makes you sick.

Maybe not quite The Best American Nonrequired Reading, but close to it.

I am reading some books off the recommended reading list for the graduate program I will be starting in the fall. I finished The Looming Tower last week. Lawrence Wright wrote it and I had started to read it in the fall and was distracted by several things, maybe applying to grad school and taking the GRE, but I finally finished it. It’s a great work of research and an accounting of the United States’ earlier attempts at killing Osama bin Laden. It details bin Laden’s earlier life and his progression from extensive farmer to infamous terrorist.

There are countless passages I would like to share and discuss on here, but I thought one in particular was telling of what knowledge so many of those who wish to attack America lack. It’s astounding how ignorance is such a strong characteristic of both sides of this battle. To give you some context, this was immediately after 9/11 and a 9/11 conspirator (Abu Jandal) was being confronted by an agent (Soufan):

“Abu Jandal was confounded by Soufan and what he represented: a Muslim who could argue religion with him, who was in the FBI, who loved America. He quickly consumed the history that Soufan game him and was shocked to learn of the American Revolution and the passionate struggle against tyranny that was woven into the American heritage. His worldview depended on the assumption that the United States was the wellspring of evil in the world.” – Wright, Lawrence. The Looming Tower : Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11. New York, NY: Alfred A. Knopf, 2006, p. 365.

The GOP Debates

Yes, I am actually watching part of the first GOP debate of the 2012 election. My first thought, I think I know why Palin isn’t up there, besides the obvious reason (she hasn’t announced an official run for the presidency), because she would have to talk and answer questions if she were in a debate. And the less she speaks and attempts to answer tough questions, including those on U.S. history, the more likely she is to keep the support she has. It is best if she stays away from talking so people don’t have the opportunity to be reminded of her striking lack of common sense, knowledge, and grasp of the English language.

Secondly, the GOP has a lot of work to do. There are a lot of people on the stage tonight and not one of them, at least in my opinion, is a standout. It feels like 2008 all over again. That’s not good for the Right.

Thirdly, Pawlenty just referred to Iraq as one of the “shining examples of success in the Middle East.” I’m sorry, but I didn’t know eight years of our presence there was considered a success when Iraq still suffers from civil war-type violence with car bombs and suicide bombers on a monthly basis. It was an amazingly stupid comment.

The Sunday Paper

A sleepy, lazy Sunday. A day of rest, at least this week, and the Sunday New York Times. Perfect. No interruptions as I read the main section of the paper front to back. First, a story about soldiers returning home after a year at war. Their ability, or lack thereof, to adjust to normal life. Clearly not a soldier, I am left to imagine how difficult this might be, but the reporting and the pictures make it possible to an extent.

Then I read about G.O.P. legislators moving to tighten rules/laws on voting. Basically, in about 13 to 15 states there are movements under way to make it necessary for voters to present a valid driver’s license, passport, or other state issued ID when they go to vote. Considering you have to have one of those in order to register to vote, I don’t think you should be required to show up with one in order to vote. Voting, at least to me, seems like one of the last great bastions of democracy, unfettered by bureaucracy and legislation. Great, you are registered to vote. All you have to do is show up to the right polling place, give your name, the volunteer or paid election worker checks it off a list, and you go make your vote. And then, of course, you get a sticker. Everything else related to electing our public officials is so damn complicated. Making the process of voting more complicated will truly discourage some from voting.

Next, a story on the F.B.I. and how vigilant they have been since 2001 in wasting their time and money by monitoring domestic terrorists who don’t have a crime more serious than trespassing on their record. I understand some of these people aren’t outstanding members of society, but 24-hour surveillance, really?

Not surprisingly, there were articles on suicide bombings in both Afghanistan and Pakistan. The bombers targeted fellow Muslims. And as I read these articles, an overwhelming, and now familiar feeling of hopelessness about our wars in the Middle East swept over me. When the terrorists are so willing and committed to kill their own brothers and sisters then it seems clear that no extended American occupation of a country over there is ever going to end this violence. I just feel it is their problem to address. Ten years in Afghanistan, progress here and there, ups and downs, and still rumors of corruption swirl around President Hamid Karzai’s government. When does it end?

There is one Arab country where Americans are wildly popular right now. Libya. Wildly popular should be put in context though. This means the American flag and effigies of our leaders aren’t regularly burned and stomped on. An American or Westerner out for a jog in eastern Libya might even get an enthusiastic yell or honk. NATO rules the skies between Gaddafi loyalists in the west and the rebels in the east. And this, “Many Libyan parents with newborn girls are reportedly naming them Susan, in honor of Susan E. Rice, the Obama administration’s ambassador to the United Nations, for her vote in the Security Council in favor of establishing the no-fly zone.”

And the French legal system would likely approach the Strauss-Kahn case with timidity. It seems it is common practice that high-ranking officials or celebrities get preferential treatment upon being accused of a crime. Or, their case is hidden from the public eye and no one really finds out about their crime or punishment.

This past week, when President Obama attempted to toast the Queen of England, the band playing “God Save the Queen” cut him off. The Queen, refusing to acknowledge the President during the song, eventually turned to him once the song was over to end the toast. I love England and British culture, but some of the etiquette world leaders and the public are expected to adhere to when they are around royals is so ridiculous. I just have a hard time taking all that pomp and circumstance seriously.

Lastly, amid all the articles I read, was an account of the devastation in Joplin, MO. Here is a passage from that article:

Here, one day, is a distraught man who describes how, while helping to dig in search of the living, he heard the distant cry of a little girl. “Don’t worry, honey, I’m getting there!” he called out, again and again, digging so frantically that his hands began to bleed. Then, suddenly, he was there. He uncovered a talking doll, and he wept.

Then he dug elsewhere, he says. This time he uncovered a dead girl, and he wept.

OBL: Conspirators and Complainers

Rarely does a politician pull something off that we can all celebrate regardless of where we are on the political spectrum. I think Bin Laden’s death is worth celebrating. Although it was President Obama who made the call, President Bush deserves congratulations as well. Bush said we would never stop searching and Obama made finding and killing or apprehending Bin Laden the priority of our wars in the Middle East.

I was at work just a couple of days after the Bin Laden news broke when I heard someone talking about it. There was talk among some employees of the Bin Laden conspiracy. Is he really dead? If he is dead, then where are the pictures? This has come to be called deatherism. Also, there seems to be quite a few people out there who don’t know why we buried him at sea. I explained this to someone the other day and their response, “So, all of a sudden we respect Islamic tradition?” My response, “Well, isn’t it better now than never?” Seriously. Could you imagine how many more people would be upset about Bin Laden’s death if we didn’t observe the burial custom?

Most Republicans have congratulated President Obama and President Bush in their statements about the killing of OBL. However, as far as I know, one only congratulated Bush. Her name I will not mention, but if you’ve graduated high school you know about as much as she does about U.S. history, government, geography, and current events. Which is to say, you just graduated a U.S. high school, so you probably don’t know too much, but it’s enough to get your name on the ticket for VP of the U.S.A. Dream big.

Lastly, I hope I never have to celebrate another man’s death to the degree I celebrated OBL's death. I am happy he is dead. The dancing and singing in the streets the night of his death does not seem barbaric to me. Our celebration that night is in no way comparable to barbaric celebrations in the Middle East over Koran burning, successful terrorist attacks, or the maiming/killing of western troops throughout the region, which happen a couple times a week. Like I said earlier, I think we can have one night in the last ten years to dance in the streets. I approve.

From The New Yorker

Steve Coll, author of The Bin Ladens: An Arabian Family in the American Century, and staff writer at The New Yorker has an informative post up on the News Desk blog. Worth the read.

The Death of Osama Bin Laden

This is as close as our generation will come to experiencing the sense of joy and excitement millions around the world felt on May 8, 1945, VE Day. Osama Bin Laden, long removed from direct day-to-day operations of al-Qaeda, but still the influential and spiritual leader of al-Qaeda and many splinter groups around the world and the leading force in the 9/11 attacks was killed yesterday.

Bin Laden, more than anyone else, has shaped US Foreign Policy in the last ten years. From our security at home to our approach to the rest of the Middle East to our action on three fronts (Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan), Bin Laden was the primary target of the war we have been waging for 9 years. This is huge. It took the most powerful nation in the world nearly 10 years to find and kill one man. One man. His ability to camouflage himself will not be forgotten, but his violent end will overshadow everything else for me. I was ready for sleep last night and I turned on the TV. Instantly, I sat up in bed and told Kate to stop talking for a minute. There was a CBS News special report and along the bottom I read that President Obama is going to make an announcement soon. About what I did not know until a few seconds later when a reporter said Osama Bin Laden has been killed. I looked at Kate, whose eyes were huge with the news, and I sat up a little more, turning the volume up and settling in for President Obama’s announcement.

The details of his death are rapidly spreading across the media and blogosphere. According to some sources, it was a double-tap to the side of the head during or at the end of a firefight outside a curiously large compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan. The operation, in the works since August, was completed in 40 minutes. Bin Laden’s body was taken by US Navy Seals, identified, and buried at sea within 24 hours of his death (according to Islamic tradition).

I have spent the morning reading the blogs and news feeds of most of the world’s major papers. The one thing that is not overlooked by the media, who are always speculating about political implications, is how this will affect Obama’s chances in 2012 and if it will be his defining moment as President. I think it’s important to examine the political effects of this news, but more important is to first celebrate what this means for our troops, the families of the thousands killed and injured on 9/11, and the American psyche in regards to the war against terrorism.

It is not natural to celebrate a death. But this morning, I was happy to. I watched archival footage of the 9/11 attacks. I watched cadets at the Naval Academy yelling their hearts out. I watched someone spraying champagne from his perch on a light post onto the crowd gathered below him at Ground Zero. And, truly, I felt pride for what America has done. My pulse elevated and I recalled the morning I was going to class as a freshman at the University of Wyoming with people crying throughout the union, unable to pull themselves from a TV to go to class, where, if they went, they would undoubtedly be watching a TV anyway. I recalled the spring break the USA went to war in Iraq. Sitting on the couch with Aaron, watching the shock and awe campaign, wondering if this was really a necessary strike to avenge 9/11. Nearly two-thirds of the country had given up on finding/killing Bin Laden, but our troops and intelligence gatherers have never rested. Neither has President Obama who clarified again and again as candidate Obama in 2008 that if he received reliable intelligence that Bin Laden was in Pakistan, he would not hesitate to go in there unannounced and take Bin Laden out.

Naïve our generation is not. I don’t think one of us believes this means the end of terrorism. The detractors are already pointing this out, assuming that some must believe the end of terrorism has come. We know it hasn’t. There will be more terrorists. There will always be evil in this world, but this was a victory America had to have. The celebrations across the country do not bother me at all. If the extremists can go kill Westerners anytime a Koran is burned or stomped on, then we can have one day in the last ten years to yell in the street, to wave the American flag, to put on display our fanaticism for all the world to see. Yeah, I don’t feel bad about that.

Reading through the blogs has uncovered bits of information about the raid and the coincidence of May 1^st in 20^th and 21^st century war. May 1, 1945: Hitler’s suicide is announced to the world. May 1, 2003: President Bush gives his infamous Mission Accomplished speech from the deck of the USS Abraham Lincoln. May 1, 2011: President Obama shares the news of Bin Laden’s death in Pakistan.

Most troubling about the news of where Bin Laden was hiding out is the fact that he was in a relatively affluent neighborhood and not in a cave like many presumed for years. He was in a mansion six to eight times bigger than any of the surrounding houses with high walls and barbed wire. How could anyone in the ISI (Pakistan’s intelligence service) not know about Bin Laden’s location? This makes it clear for those who doubted it; Pakistan is the home of al-Qaeda operations and the source of much of what we are dealing with in Afghanistan. The Pakistani government routinely denied that Bin Laden was hiding out in Pakistan. Wisely, the US intelligence did not share much information of the operation with the ISI, worried that word would get to Bin Laden and he would slip through our fingers again.

If the administration were looking for another reason to get out of Afghanistan, this is it. Bin Laden has been the target from day 1: September 11, 2001. He was the reason we went to Afghanistan, almost sealing the deal at Tora Bora in December 2001. His death marks the end of a chapter and the beginning of a new one in the war on terror. I think it is important to remain cautious and to not let our guard down, but today, tonight, whenever, remember 9/11, remember the firefighters, remember the policemen, remember the troops, and remember what you felt that morning and raise a glass, spray some champagne, sing the Star Spangled Banner and wave the flag.

Reading the News

It's official. I am going blog crazy this morning. Thank God for the internet on days like this. The accessibility to the facts and the commentary on Bin Laden's death is amazing. I highly recommend stopping by Andrew Sullivan's blog (now on the Daily Beast, but my link in the sidebar still works) or Talking Points Memo (also linked in the sidebar). Both of those blogs are covering all angles of this story, from archival footage of Bush and Obama speaking about Bin Laden to amateur footage of 9/11, which is tough to watch, but a good reminder of how justified the USA was in hunting this man for nearly the last ten years.

I headed out early this morning to pick up a New York Times. I like to collect newspapers the day after huge events. Anyway, the Times was the only paper without a headline on Bin Laden's death. The news broke too late. Tomorrow's paper will have plenty of coverage, including Bin Laden's obituary, which runs seven pages on the Times' website.

What Trump Was Doing While Obama Was Killing Osama

Also from Sullivan's blog. One of his readers too.

A reader writes:

While Obama was addressing the nation last night, Donald Trump was hosting a cat-fight between NeNe and Starr Jones, voting off some chick named Hope, and making an "historic" decision to bring back LaToya Jackson.

Seriously.

Sweetness

Thanks to Sullivan for posting this on his blog. I don't know where it came from, but it's truly awesome.

Damn You, MSNBC

All I want right now is to get some information about our newest war in the Middle East, err, I mean, Africa, and I am surfing the cable news channels (all of them), but freaking MSNBC, you're showing "Lockup"? C'mon!

Midterms

This is my push, my one political blog before the midterm vote next week. This is where I stand. I voted for Obama, a human, not the second-coming of Jesus, so getting crap done takes a long time and given the problems the country faces now his presidency is one of the hardest in decades. He is doing his best and I believe it is much too early to see if his best is good enough for what America needs. I believe the rising tide of fear in this country is a cyclical event pushed on us by the party not in power and by the media. But I also believe the opposition has gone over the edge with claims of socialism and comparisons of Obama to Hitler. I think if Obama’s 2008 supporters go out there next Tuesday and vote for a Republican, they are voting in fear and they will be fueling a machine which runs on myth and superstition, a machine which is led by Glenn Beck, who hasn’t completed one college-level course in anything, and Sarah Palin. To so soon hand the reins of power back to the Republicans would be a huge mistake. Think about it. Agree or Disagree. Just be patient and sane and go vote in one week.

Like I said, I voted for Barack Obama in 2008. I was part of that liberal tide that swept across America in the wake of eight Bush years. But I was not under a magical spell when I worked for the campaign, nor was I when I voted for the man in November. I voted for a young, relatively inexperienced politician, but I also voted for a Constitutional Law professor, a man with a top-notch education, which a disturbing portion of America believes makes a man disconnected and out of touch with the “real” America. I thought then—and I still do—that a president with an Ivy League education isn’t a bad idea, but a good one. Some say his education classifies him as an elitist. Good.

I was wary of lavishing too much praise on candidate Obama when I was working for him. And now I am wary of agreeing with every one of his policies just because I voted for him. I don’t agree with some things he has done. Frankly, he hasn’t been as liberal as candidate Obama, almost kowtowing to the Republicans at times. I want him to be tougher and show off the intelligence I know he has. It reminds me of the debates with Hillary and the other Democratic candidates running in the primaries. Obama’s levelheadedness was agonizing at times in the face of ridiculous criticisms he faced about his friendship with Reverend Wright and his connection with William Ayers. I wanted Obama just to lash out once and put these absurd people in their place, both in the media and in the party. But it never happened.

I eventually really appreciated that about candidate Obama, but I am having a hard time appreciating that about President Obama. By voting for Obama I gave him a personal mandate to run the country the way candidate Obama wanted to run the country. Really close Gitmo, don’t just try once, hit a roadblock and give up. Really end the wars in the Middle East…don’t get bogged down in Afghanistan, much more of an endless war than Iraq ever was. Really end Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, not just keep promising it will end on your watch. Really restore sanity and an America I can be openly proud of when I am not in America. Don’t let the people across the aisle get you down, not tiptoe around an issue until it is too late for it to be resolved the way candidate Obama promised it would be.

But do not mistake me for someone who regrets voting for Obama. Not. Even. Close. At times, as explained above, I am impatient with the progress, but then I see someone from the Tea Party on TV or I read the signs pictured at right-wing rallies and I realize I am very, very patient and comfortingly sane. For now, the Democrats deserve to keep their hold on the House and the Senate. Obama hasn’t been in power for two years yet. How would he have solved the greatest recession since the Great Depression in 22 months? Americans need a heavy dose of patience and sanity. Give the man two more years and see what happens. Hell, we gave Bush eight years, we can afford to give Obama and his squad half that much.

Hate for Hastings

I noticed it. All this contempt for this so-called freelance journalist, Michael Hastings, with the word 'freelance' uttered in such a way as to connote he is one of those not-so-good journalists who has to take assignments as they come to him and that's why he is writing for Rolling Stone, a magazine that doesn't do journalism anymore. On the contrary, the Hastings piece is the type of journalism that is now, for the most part, extinct at the larger media outlets. It is so extinct that the publication of a great story makes for a story itself, at least for all the mainstream outlets.

All this to say, there's a great piece over at Vanity Fair about the hate for Hastings. This is the second semi-political post in as many days and another interesting article. Here the link: Why the Hacks Hate Michael Hastings.

Petraeus for McChrystal

Sullivan has a must read post about hiring Petraeus to replace McChrystal. Money quote:

This much we also know: Obama will run for re-election with far more troops in Afghanistan than Bush ever had - and a war and occupation stretching for ever into the future, with no realistic chance of success. Make no mistake: this is an imperialism of self-defense, a commitment to civilize even the least tractable culture on earth because Americans are too afraid of the consequences of withdrawal. And its deepest irony is that continuing this struggle will actually increase and multiply the terror threats we face - as it becomes once again a recruitment tool for Jihadists the world over.