Will the Afghan Quagmire Become Barack Obama’s War?

NY Times columnist Bob Herbert has begun to emerge from the euphoria common to Obama supporters since the president-elect first announced his candidacy by declaring himself the reincarnation of Abraham Lincoln from the steps of the old capital building in Springfield, Ill.

In today’s op-ed Herbert offers a sober critique of Obama’s campaign promise of a military surge in Afghanistan and explains how it might easily become Obama’s war. Herbert writes:

“The economy is obviously issue No. 1 as Barack Obama prepares to take over the presidency. He’s charged with no less a task than pulling the country out of a brutal recession. If the worst-case scenarios materialize, his job will be to stave off a depression.

“That’s enough to keep any president pretty well occupied. What Mr. Obama doesn’t need, and what the U.S. cannot under any circumstances afford, is any more unnecessary warfare. And yet, while we haven’t even figured out how to extricate ourselves from the disaster in Iraq, Mr. Obama is planning to commit thousands of additional American troops to the war in Afghanistan, which is already more than seven years old and which long ago turned into a quagmire.”

Herbert cites other sources in Times and Newsweek to make the point that escalating the war in Afghanistan forces radical Islamists over the border into Pakistan threatening to destabilize that nuclear-armed nation.

Herbert contends:

“Our interest in Afghanistan is to prevent it from becoming a haven for terrorists bent on attacking us. That does not require the scale of military operations that the incoming administration is contemplating. It does not require a wholesale occupation. It does not require the endless funneling of human treasure and countless billions of taxpayer dollars to the Afghan government at the expense of rebuilding the United States, which is falling apart before our very eyes.”

Noting the corruption of the Afghanistan government including President Karzai, Herbert maintains:

“If Mr. Obama does send more troops to Afghanistan, he should go on television and tell the American people, in the clearest possible language, what he is trying to achieve. He should spell out the mission’s goals, and lay out an exit strategy.

“He will owe that to the public because he will own the conflict at that point. It will be Barack Obama’s war.”

More Than Four Thousand Readers Respond To Coverage Of Ann Coulter at The Huffington Post

I submit this post today in the spirit of the Reuters feature, Oddly Enough:

The Huffington Post’s banner headline on the front page today, CBS Takes Out the Trash, refers to right-winger Ann Coulter’s appearance on the Early Show this morning. However, I was drawn to Huffpo’s coverage of Coulter’s efforts to promote the obvious drivel in her new book, Guilty, by the stunning number of readers’ comments. At this writing, 4224 people have taken the time to reply.

According to Huffpo’s latest update at 8:55 a.m. ‘“Coulter appeared on CBS's The Early Show where she told anchor Harry Smith that he was her favorite for having her on this morning after The Today Show had canceled her. Smith allowed Coulter to rant, but then pushed her on claims of right-wing victimization and urged her to ‘take a breath.’ He also called her ‘goofy’ and ‘sophomoric.’”

This morning’s update followed Huffpo’s coverage of Coulter’s earlier interactions with the media, including the cancellation of her appearance on the Today Show and mention of the campaign of liberal watchdog Media Matters.org asking, Is NBC Going to Help Coulter Sell This Book?

But the real story here is about Huffpo’s readers:

Evidently not realizing that page views and readers’ comments dictate to a large extent coverage at blogs like Huffington Post, one reader wrote (errors included), “I am staring to get a little cynical about HP. This has been the main story for a long time and is really a non story about a media person. Is HP getting too self absorbed?”

Here are a few additional samples of comments taken off the top:

“I must say she is truly sassy smarmy sub-filth -- even laughing on Alan Colmes' radio show LAST NIGHT -- January 5, 2009 -- that gay people's only need for marriage versus civil right was "to visit each other in the hospital"....OY what a twisted wreck of a human she is.”

“Why do shows continue to host this person?”

“Ann need not look further than Sara Palin and her daughter for evidence that illegitimacy is not a liberal issue.”

“Right, Anne. George Bush is a victim. Right. That's a good one.”

“Good for NBC for cancelling. Really tired of hearing conservatives bash everything that is not them or their ideology. Harry did a good job patronizing her--she looked shrill and deflated by the end of it.”

“That is one psychotic piece of work, that woman is dangerous. One of these days we will read about her and a wild eyed rampage. Who would pay good money to read that garbage,..........another psychotic piece of work of course.”

‘“The controversial author accused the network of orchestrating a "set up to block me from other TV shows." Ah, so tv appearances are an entitlement now for raving heldenshrikes such as Coulter. I did not know that.”’

“Does she own any other clothes? All she ever wears is that black dress with the boots.”

“I'm sure this has already been said, but I liked her much better with her mouth wired SHUT!”

Oops. I just checked and the number of comments is now up to 4447.

The “Clinton Parameters” Essential to Resolving the Latest Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

In today’s op-ed on the escalating Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the Boston Globe’s James Carroll carefully buries a constrained, though favorable mention of Bill Clinton and without giving Hillary the courtesy of mentioning her name, our esteemed pundit includes a brief reference to the recently named secretary of state.

Based on his prior vilification of the Clintons, one has to be surprised that Carroll is actually giving the former president credit for a positive contribution during his administration: invention of the “wheel of peace” required to resolve the latest tragic middle-east flare-up.

Carroll writes (emphasis mine):

"His {President-elect Obama’s} enlightenment can be assumed. The question is one of will. Majorities of Israelis and Palestinians understand what the solution requires; the wheel of peace is already invented. Indeed, as the writer Bernard Avishai observes, Obama's secretary of state bears the name of its most succinct summary - "the Clinton parameters." Majorities understand also that the door is fast closing on the two-state finale, which alone offers hope of long-term reconciliation. What is needed now are firm messages from Washington: Israel must cease fire, respect Palestinian rights, and keep agreements; Palestinians must halt rockets, repudiate terror, and empower moderates toward a new unity. Obama must draw the line with both.”

Throughout his op-ed, Carroll pointedly avoids giving Secretary of State Hillary Clinton any role in helping to resolve this impending crisis for the new administration. True to his infatuation with the One, Carroll gives Obama sole responsibility for bringing the matter to a successful close.

A little background here on my feelings about Carroll:

Carroll was tops on my list of preferred pundits prior to the Democratic primary and its subsequent rigged convention. I knew from his biography, for example, that he lectures on Jewish-Christian reconciliation, on Catholic reform, and on the question of war and peace, and that he participates in Jewish-Christian-Muslim encounters at the Shalom Hartman Institute in Jerusalem. I had long enjoyed reading his columns, a few of which I thought were exquisitely written.

Carroll was among several columnists I considered to be trustworthy liberals prior to the campaign coverage of 2008. Consequently, I felt personally betrayed when Carroll joined the growing list of pundits best described as liberal except for their common streak of misogyny that revealed itself in the ongoing vilification of Hillary Clinton, America’s first viable female presidential candidate.

Carroll’s most vicious attack on both Hillary and Bill Clinton appeared in his column on Aug. 25, 2008, day one of the Democratic Convention in Denver. It’s hard to choose from his egregious comments to illustrate my point, but here’s a sample:

“It was inevitable that each Clinton be spotlighted at the convention, but the prime-time focus on Hillary on Tuesday and Bill on Wednesday, with the Hillary Clinton roll call assuring an unpredictable outburst, threatens to derail the Obama campaign before it leaves the station. The Clinton-driven political extortion that made the vice-presidential selection so tortuous is just the beginning. The November election hangs on the Clinton hangover, the die-hard alienation of so many Clinton supporters, half of whom still decline to back Obama.”

Carroll then proceeds to disparage Bill Clinton’s Administration, noted for its eight years of peace and prosperity. Among other things, Carroll blames the former president for today’s problems with Iran and Russia and a potential Cold War II. Accusing Clinton of being utterly lacking in character, Carroll also blames him for any lingering problems on the domestic front.

I didn’t bother to read Carroll’s take on how the Democratic convention actually unfolded; that is, if he bothered to write one in which even a modicum of personal honesty would have required him to note how both Clintons went overboard in their support of Obama and brought the house down during their separate appearances.

Today’s op-ed proves that although he found it necessary to mention the “Clinton parameters” above, Carroll feels no remorse for his earlier smears of Bill and Hillary Clinton, and he will continue his attempts to diminish them at every opportunity.

I have a message for James Carroll: If you want to know who is “utterly lacking in character,” go take a long look in the mirror.

Obama Nets Political Capital by Honoring Rick Warren

At OnTop Magazine this morning, Carlos Santoscoy points out that President-elect Obama is reaping political capital for picking an anti-gay pastor to deliver the inaugural invocation on Jan. 20.

Santoscoy explains:

‘“While the pro-gay left media has been busy pointing out the inconsistencies of choosing Saddleback megachurch leader Rev. Rick Warren – he likened gay marriage to polygamy and an incestuous relationship, while Obama says he is a ‘fierce advocate of equality for gay and lesbian Americans’ – social conservatives, particularly the evangelical left, has been heaping praise on Obama – effectively canceling out any loss of political capital he may have otherwise suffered.”’

Santoscoy concludes his post: “Favoring a homophobic pastor to such an honorable position and gaining political traction from that misstep can only spell trouble for gay rights activists who had viewed the election of Obama as the silver lining of an otherwise somber Election Day.”

I noted in a previous post that the ugly misogyny endured by both Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin in 2008 has encouraged other cultures to continue their barbaric treatment of women, e.g., the stoning to death of a 13-year-old Somali girl who had been brutally raped by three men and the brutal exploitation of teenage girls in Cambodia described in a recent column by Nicholas Kristof.

In a related matter, we need also to examine the harmful effect of disrespecting gay rights inherent in Obama’s politically profitable decision to honor Rick Warren at his inauguration.

Already reeling from the passage of California’s Proposition 8, actively supported by Pastor Warren, the GLBT community has recently been jolted by news accounts of the gang rape of a lesbian in San Francisco.

The Associated Press reported today, Jan. 2:

“Two men and two teens have been arrested on suspicion of gang-raping a woman last month in the San Francisco Bay area while allegedly taunting her for being a lesbian, police said Thursday.

“Officers arrested Humberto Hernandez Salvador at his Richmond home Wednesday night, Richmond police Lt. Mark Gagan said. The 31-year-old is being held without bail on gang rape, kidnapping and carjacking charges.

“Police on Wednesday also arrested a 15-year-old Richmond boy and a 16-year-old Hercules boy, who were being held at a juvenile detention center on similar charges. Their names were not released.

“The 45-minute attack started when one of the men approached the woman in the street, struck her with a blunt object, ordered her to disrobe and sexually assaulted her with the help of the others, according to detectives.

“When the group saw another person approaching, they forced the victim back into her car and took her to a burned-out apartment building. She was raped again inside and outside the vehicle and left naked outside the building while the alleged assailants took her wallet and drove off in her car, police said.”

Our nation’s leaders, including our soon-to-be president, and our media are urged to open their eyes to the real world consequences of their careless disregard for the rights of women and gays both here and elsewhere in the world.

The question arises: Is the political power won by trashing our most prominent female political leaders and honoring a homophobic pastor worth the unspeakable abuse of innocent people?

Bill and Hill Celebrate New Year’s Eve in Times Square

Bill and Hillary Clinton had quite a year in 2008. But it’s America’s good fortune that misogyny, sexism, a biased media, the radical right, the looney left, a fraudulent Democratic primary and a rigged convention couldn’t keep the Clintons down. On New Year’s Eve, Bill and Hill helped lower the ball in Times Square and celebrated the occasion by dancing together.

Now Hillary, with Bill at her side, can look forward to helping the in-experienced Obama shape foreign policy in her role as secretary of state. Considering the global turmoil the Bush Administration leaves behind, we look forward to the dawning of a new era in international relationships.

Go Hillary!

Misogyny in America Encourages the Abuse of Women in Other Cultures

There was a lot of rehashing of the Democratic primary and the general election campaign in the final weeks of 2008. In the process, even Howard Dean publicly acknowledged the sexism endured by Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin.

Reading Nicholas Kristof’s painful op-ed in the New York Times this new year’s morning on the brutal exploitation of teenage girls in Cambodia reminded me that Kristof – well known for his reports on the abuse of females in other cultures – joined his so-called liberal colleagues in the media in their concerted attempt to force Hillary Clinton to drop out of the race.

Gloria Steinem among others has since reminded us that no male candidate has ever been told to drop out.

In the meantime Obama named Clinton as secretary of state in his administration. That distinction did not inhibit Jon Favreau, the head of Obama’s speechwriting team, from joining a drunken male friend to sexually molest a cardboard cutout of Clinton.

Needless to say Favreau has not been fired for his adventure in hate speech; we hear the young man is busy working on Obama’s inaugural address.

It’s long been my contention that the repeated evidence of misogyny in America - reported worldwide - gives permission to other cultures to continue horrific treatment of girls and women.

We’re reminded of the 13-year-old Somali girl who was brutally raped by three men while on her way to visit her grandmother. The child went to the authorities for help and was charged with adultery. She was then publicly stoned to death.

To my knowledge Sen. Hillary Clinton was the only American official to write a letter to the United Nations on behalf of this child.

This morning, Kristof’s column is yet another on the abuse of girls and women in poor countries; this time he tells the story of Sina Vann, a teenager in Cambodia brutally forced into prostitution.

Among the ugly details:

“Sina is Vietnamese but was kidnapped at the age of 13 and taken to Cambodia, where she was drugged. She said she woke up naked and bloody on a bed with a white man — she doesn’t know his nationality — who had purchased her virginity.”

I’m left wondering if Kristof will ever take responsibility for his role -along with his sexist colleagues in the media - in the world’s continued ill treatment of girls and women.

I doubt it.

Resolved in 2009: "Deep Listening and Loving Speech"

Vietnamese Buddhist Thich Nhat Hanh

Reading Vietnamese Buddhist Thich Nhat Hanh this New Year’s morning, I came across the perfect resolution in 2009 for all those interested in improving their communication skills and especially representatives of the mainstream media and the blogosphere.

Deep Listening and Loving Speech is the fourth of the five mindfulness trainings:

Aware of the suffering caused by unmindful speech and the inability to listen to others, I vow to cultivate loving speech and deep listening in order to bring joy and happiness to others and relieve others of their suffering. Knowing that words can create happiness or suffering, I vow to learn to speak truthfully with words that inspire self-confidence, joy, and hope. I am determined not to spread news that I do not know to be certain and not to criticize or condemn things of which I am not sure. I will refrain from uttering words that can cause division or discord, or that can cause the family or the community to break. I will make all efforts to reconcile and resolve all conflicts, however small.

A safe and happy new year to all Katalusis readers,

Virginia