Reality Window

Obama's National Security Team

2008-12-01T18:39:22Z

President-Elect Barack Obama introduced his National Security Team this morning; a team which includes Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense, Eric Holder as Attorney General, Janet Napolitano as Secretary of Homeland Security, Susan Rice as UN Ambassador and James Jones as National Security Adviser. If you're curious, as most Americans are, about Barack Obama and his approach to governing and to our national security and leadership, then the following video clips will be useful in satisfying your curiosity. What is unfortunate is that most Americans will not watch these clips. Even reading the transcript will not replace hearing and seeing the emphasis that he placed on certain phrases. Watching Obama and his team is a reassuring experience. We've chosen someone with a serious approach to American security and leadership in the world and he's put together a team that has a clear understanding of the complexities involved in achieving that vision. Those who don't have time to watch this will miss out the depth of conviction with which the Obama team is approaching their mission.

Transcript of prepared remarks below the fold.

After Obama spoke, members of his National Security team each spoke briefly starting with Hillary Clinton.

The press Q&A section of today's press conference introducing Obama's nation security team runs about 16 min. in this clip and is followed by roughly 14 min. of commentary by various MSNBC people.

I thought this exchange was particularly significant. It occurs from 2:16 to 5:42 in the Q&A clip above.

Question: You've selected a number of high-profile people for your National Security team. How can you ensure that the staff that you are assembling is going to be a smoothly functioning team of rivals and not a clash of rivals?
Answer: I think you hear Joe mention the fact that many of the people standing here beside me are people who have worked together before, who have the utmost respect for each other. These are outstanding public servants and outstanding in their various fields of endeavor. They would not have agreed to join my administration and I would not have asked them to be part of this administration unless we shared a core vision of what's needed to keep the American people safe and to assure prosperity here at home and peace abroad. I think all of us here share the belief that we have to maintain the strongest military on the planet, that we have to support our troops, make sure that they are properly trained, properly equipped, that they are provided with a mission that allows them to succeed. All of us here also agree that the strength of our military has to be combined with the wisdom and force of our diplomacy and that we are going to be committed to building and strengthening alliances around the world to advance American interests and American security. And so in discussions with this entire team, what I am excited about is a consensus not only among those of us standing here today but across a broad section of the American people that now is the time for us to regain American leadershp in all its dimensions and I am very confident that each of these individuals would not be leaving the outstanding work that they're currently doing if they weren't convinced that they can work as an effective team. One last point I will make. I assembled this team because I'm a strong believer in strong personalities and strong opinions. I think that's how that's how the best decisions are made. One of the dangers in a White House, based on my reading of history, is that you get wrapped up in groupthink and everybody agrees with everything and there's no discussion, there are no dissenting views. So I'm going to be welcoming a vigorous debate inside the White House but understand, I will be setting policy as President. I will be responsible for the vision that this team carries out and I expect them to implement that vision once decisions are made. So as Harry Truman said, the buck will stop with me. And nobody who's standing here would have agreed to join this administration unless they had confidence that, in fact, that vision was one that would help secure the American people and our interests.

There are more significant moments, particularly his comment on maintaining "the strongest military on the planet". Add to his comments, those of his new team and they leave us with the impression of a strong, confident, unified team ready to go on Jan. 20th. Obama's comfort in the press conference environment, responding with complex, intelligent answers off the cuff is a very pleasant change. There's no cringe-worthy moments. Also worthy of note just as a small reflection on growth of opportunity for all Americans, there were only three white males on the stage out of a group of eight people. Out of the nominees, only two of six. But the real point wasn't their diversity. The real point is that each of those people was there on merit, because of the strength of their experience and accomplishments. It was impressive to see. ]]>

Remarks of President-Elect Barack Obama

Announcement of National Security Team December 1, 2008 Chicago, Illinois Good morning. Last week, we announced our economic team, which is working as we speak to craft an Economic Recovery Program to create jobs and grow our struggling economy. Today, Vice President-elect Biden and I are pleased to announce our national security team. The national security challenges we face are just as grave - and just as urgent - as our economic crisis. We are fighting two wars. Old conflicts remain unresolved, and newly assertive powers have put strains on the international system. The spread of nuclear weapons raises the peril that the world's deadliest technology could fall into dangerous hands. Our dependence on foreign oil empowers authoritarian governments and endangers our planet. America must also be strong at home to be strong abroad. We need to provide education and opportunity for our citizens, so every American can compete with anyone, anywhere. And our economic power must sustain our military strength, our diplomatic leverage, and our global leadership. The common thread linking these challenges is the fundamental reality that in the 21st century, our destiny is shared with the world's. From our markets to our security; from our public health to our climate -we must act with the understanding that, now more than ever, we have a stake in what happens across the globe. And as we learned so painfully on 9/11, terror cannot be contained by borders, nor safety provided by oceans alone. Last week, we were reminded of this threat once again when terrorists took the lives of six American among nearly 200 victims in Mumbai. In the world we seek, there is no place for those who kill innocent civilians to advance hateful extremism. This weekend, I told Prime Minister Singh that Americans stand with the people of India in this dark time. And I am confident that India's great democracy is more resilient than killers who would tear it down. And so, in this uncertain world, the time has come for a new beginning - a new dawn of American leadership to overcome the challenges of the 21st century, and to seize the opportunities embedded in those challenges. We will strengthen our capacity to defeat our enemies and support our friends. We will renew old alliances and forge new and enduring partnerships. We will show the world once more that America is relentless in defense of our people, steady in advancing our interests, and committed to the ideals that shine as a beacon to the world: democracy and justice; opportunity and unyielding hope - because American values are America's greatest export to the world. To succeed, we must pursue a new strategy that skillfully uses, balances, and integrates all elements of American power: our military and diplomacy; our intelligence and law enforcement; our economy and the power of our moral example. The team that we have assembled here today is uniquely suited to do just that. In their past service and plans for the future, these men and women represent all of those elements of American power, and the very best of the American example. They have served in uniform and as diplomats; they have worked as legislators, law enforcement officials, and executives. They share my pragmatism about the use of power, and my sense of purpose about America's role as a leader in the world. I have known Hillary Clinton as a friend, a colleague, a source of counsel, and as a campaign opponent. She possesses an extraordinary intelligence and toughness, and a remarkable work ethic. I am proud that she will be our next Secretary of State. She is an American of tremendous stature who will have my complete confidence; who knows many of the world's leaders; who will command respect in every capitol; and who will clearly have the ability to advance our interests around the world. Hillary's appointment is a sign to friend and foe of the seriousness of my commitment to renew American diplomacy and restore our alliances. There is much to do - from preventing the spread of nuclear weapons to Iran and North Korea, to seeking a lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians, to strengthening international institutions. I have no doubt that Hillary Clinton is the right person to lead our State Department, and to work with me in tackling this ambitious foreign policy agenda. At a time when we face an unprecedented transition amidst two wars, I have asked Robert Gates to continue as Secretary of Defense, and I'm pleased that he's accepted. Two years ago, he took over the Pentagon at a difficult time. He restored accountability. He won the confidence of military commanders, and the trust of our brave men and women in uniform, and their families. He earned the respect of members of Congress on both sides of the aisle for his pragmatism and competence. He knows that we need a sustainable national security strategy - and that includes a bipartisan consensus at home. As I said throughout the campaign, I will be giving Secretary Gates and our military a new mission as soon as I take office: responsibly ending the war in Iraq through a successful transition to Iraqi control. We will also ensure that we have the strategy - and resources - to succeed against al Qaeda and the Taliban. As Bob said not too long ago, Afghanistan is where the war on terror began, and it is where it must end. And going forward, we will continue to make the investments necessary to strengthen our military and increase our ground forces to defeat the threats of the 21st century. Eric Holder has the talent and commitment to succeed as Attorney General from his first day on the job, which is even more important in a transition that demands vigilance. He has distinguished himself as a prosecutor, a Judge, and a senior official, and he is deeply familiar with the law enforcement challenges we face- from terrorism to counter-intelligence; from white collar crime to public corruption. Eric also has the combination of toughness and independence that we need at the Justice Department. Let me be clear: the Attorney General serves the American people. And I have every expectation that Eric will protect our people, uphold the public trust, and adhere to our Constitution. Janet Napolitano offers the experience and executive skill that we need in the next Secretary of Homeland Security. She has spent her career protecting people - as a US Attorney, an Attorney General, and as Governor of Arizona. She understands the need for a Department of Homeland Security that has the capacity to help prevent terrorist attacks and respond to catastrophe - be it manmade or natural. Janet assumes this critical role having learned the lessons - some of them painful - of the last several years, from 9/11 to Katrina. She insists on competence and accountability. She knows firsthand the need to have a partner in Washington that works well with state and local governments. She understands as well as anyone the danger of an unsecure border. And she will be a leader who can reform a sprawling Department while safeguarding our homeland. Susan Rice will take on the crucial task of serving as Permanent Representative of the United States to the United Nations. Susan has been a close and trusted advisor. As in previous Administrations, the UN Ambassador will serve as a member of my cabinet and integral member of my team. Her background as a scholar, on the National Security Council, and Assistant Secretary of State will serve our nation well at the United Nations. Susan knows that the global challenges we face demand global institutions that work. She shares my belief that the UN is an indispensable - and imperfect - forum. She will carry the message that our commitment to multilateral action must be coupled with a commitment to reform. We need the UN to be more effective as a venue for collective action - against terror and proliferation; climate change and genocide; poverty and disease. Finally, I am convinced that General James Jones is uniquely suited to be a strong and skilled National Security Advisor. Generations of Joneses have served heroically on the battlefield - from the beaches of Tarawa in World War II, to Foxtrot Ridge in Vietnam. Jim's Silver Star is a proud part of that legacy. He will bring to the job the dual experience of serving in uniform and as a diplomat. He has commanded a platoon in battle, served as Supreme Allied Commander in a time of war, and worked on behalf of peace in the Middle East. Jim is focused on the threats of today and the future. He understands the connection between energy and national security, and has worked on the frontlines of global instability - from Kosovo to northern Iraq to Afghanistan. He will advise me and work effectively to integrate our efforts across the government, so that we are effectively using all elements of American power to defeat unconventional threats and promote our values. I am confident that this is the team that we need to make a new beginning for American national security. This morning, we met to discuss the situation in Mumbai and some of the challenges that we face in the months and years ahead. In the coming weeks, I will be in close contact with these advisors, who will be working with their counterparts in the Bush Administration to make sure that we are ready to hit the ground running on January 20. Given the range of threats that we face - and the vulnerability that can be a part of every presidential transition - I hope that we can proceed swiftly for those national security officials who demand confirmation. We move forward with the humility that comes with knowing that there are brave men and women protecting us on the front lines. Troops serving their second, third, or fourth tours. Diplomats and intelligence officers in dangerous corners of the world. FBI agents in the field, cops on the beat, prosecutors in our courts, and cargo inspectors at our ports. These selfless Americans whose names are unknown to most of us will form the backbone of our effort. If we serve as well as they do, we will protect our country and promote our values. And we move forward with respect for America's tradition of a bipartisan national security policy, and a commitment to national unity. When it comes to keeping our nation and our people safe, we are not Republicans and we are not Democrats: we are Americans. There is no monopoly of power or wisdom in either party. Together, as one nation, as one people, we can shape our times instead of being shaped by them. Together, we will meet the challenges of the 21st century not with fear, but with hope. Now, before I take questions, I'd like to invite my team to say a few words, starting with my friend Hillary Clinton. Thank you.

The War Against Women

2008-11-30T19:23:40Z

Nicholas Kristof has highlighted the acid-attack war against Pakistani women . It's a war stretching from Afghanistan through Cambodia that is prosecuted by husbands, rejected suitors and even their own brothers and fathers. The video clip that he narrates vividly illustrates this war which is not generally acknowledged or covered in the western press. Kristof notes that there have been more than 7800 acid-burnings of women in the Islamabad area since 1994. And just this last month in Afghanistan, "men on motorcycles threw acid on a group of girls who dared to attend school. One of the girls, a 17-year-old named Shamsia, told reporters from her hospital bed: "I will go to my school even if they kill me. My message for the enemies is that if they do this 100 times, I am still going to continue my studies."" There's more video on that attack from CNN. Watch the video, read Kristof's article and consider what you might do for the Progressive Women's Association (www.pwaisbd.org) or Women for Afghan Women group.

Reviewing America's Defense Meltdown

2008-11-30T12:27:42Z

This is the chart that caught my attention: It's from a reading recommendation made by James Fallows via Sully:

Seriously, anybody who presumes to hold an opinion on America's defense needs, defense spending, and long term military strategy really has to read "America's Defense Meltdown," available in free 2MB pdf download here.

From a prior review that Fallows did:

This is a guide on how to think about, pay for, reconfigure, equip, deploy, withdraw, modernize, simplify, support, strengthen, lead, motivate, inspire, and in all other ways improve America's military establishment. [...]
What is most remarkable about the book is the array of authors who have joined to produce this anthologized volume. If I started listing a few, I would have to name them all (PDF of full list here.) They include the closest colleagues and collaborators of the late Air Force colonel John Boyd plus leading defense analysts and practitioners of the next generation. They have amply earned the right to be listened to. What I said in a blurb on the book's jacket* is, if anything, not enthusiastic enough:
The talent, judgment, and insight collected in this book are phenomenal. Over the last generation, the authors have been more right, more often, about more issues of crucial importance to American security than any other group I can think of. It is a tremendous benefit to have their views collected in one place and concentrated on the next big choices facing a new Administration. This really is a book that every serious-minded citizen should read.

Per Fallows the hardcover will be available for purchase shortly but you can start reading it now via the PDF that the Center for Defense Information has made available. More food for thought from the preface of the book:

America's defense budget is now larger in inflation adjusted dollars than at any point since the end of World War II, and yet our Army has fewer combat brigades than at any point in that period, our Navy has fewer combat ships and the Air Force has fewer combat aircraft. Our major equipment inventories for these major forces are older on average than at any point since 1946; in some cases they are at all-time historical highs in average age.

The effectiveness of America's "high-tech" weapons does not compensate for these reduced numbers. The Air Force's newest fighter, the F-35, can be regarded as only a technical failure. The Navy's newest destroyer cannot protect itself effectively against aircraft and missiles, and the Army's newest armored vehicle cannot stand up against a simple anti-armor rocket that was first designed in the 1940s.

Despite decades of acquisition reform from Washington's best minds in Congress, the Pentagon and the think tanks, cost overruns in weapon systems are higher today, in inflation adjusted dollars, than any time ever before. Not a single major weapon system has been delivered on time, on cost and as promised for performance. The Pentagon refuses to tell Congress and the public exactly how it spends the hundreds of billions of dollars appropriated to it each year. The reason for this is simple; it doesn't know how the money is spent. Technically, it doesn't even know if the money is spent. Even President George W. Bush's own Office of Management and Budget has labeled the Pentagon as one of the worst managed agencies of the entire federal government.

There's more. Go read it here.

Obama's Economic Team - Thanksgiving Week Summary

2008-11-28T14:27:54Z

Obama announced a special economic recovery advisory board which will be chaired by Paul Volcker (NYT bio). It will meet for 2 years and its renewal for another term considered at the 2 year point. Austan Goolsbee (NYT bio) will serve as the staff director as well as one of Obama's 3 economic advisors on the Council of Economic Advisors. Per Obama,

This board is modeled on the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board created by President Eisenhower to provide rigorous analysis and vigorous oversight to our intelligence community by individuals outside of government -- individuals who would be candid and unsparing in their assessment. This new board will perform a similar function for my administration as we formulate our economic policy.

So what's the difference between the National Economic Council which is the group that Larry Summers (NYT bio) will head up and the President's Council of Economic Advisers which UC-Berkeley professor Christina Romer (NYT bio) will head? Per this NPR report the Council of Economic Advisors was created by legislative decree in 1946 and it's a small group of experts who advise the president on economic policy -- a small White House think tank. The National Economic Council was created by executive order shortly after Clinton took office and its purpose is to bring together agency and department heads to coordinate economic policy, somewhat like the National Security Council. On Tuesday, Obama introduced his picks to head up the Office of Management and Budget. Peter Orszag (NYT bio) will be director of OMB and Robert Nabors, the deputy director of OMB. [transcript]

Obama made it clear that their commission is to review the budget line-by-line and come up with a smarter budget with programs that address today's needs.

This isn't about big government or small government. It's about building a smarter government that focuses on what works. And that's why I will ask my team to think anew and act anew to meet our new challenges.

On Monday Obama introduced his economic team and it was a crowd of heavy hitters. The video of his announcement and the press Q&A session that followed along with a transcript are here. On stage with Obama was Tim Geithner (NYT bio), his nominee for Treasury Secretary, Larry Summers (NYT bio) to head up the National Economic Council, Christine Romers (NYT bio) to lead the Council of Economic Advisors, and Melody Barnes (NYT bio) as director of the Domestic Policy Council. During the week the Obama team also announced Heather Higginbottom as deputy director of the Domestic Policy Council. I had a little bit of contact with Heather when I worked on the Kerry website in 2006-2007 and she was Sen. Kerry's Legislative Director. Comments from President-Elect Obama during his third press conference highlighted how he's approaching the formation of his team and the chatter about the Clinton administration alums present in in his selections.

I suspect that you would be troubled and the American people would be troubled if I selected a Treasury secretary or a chairman of the National Economic Council at one of the most critical economic times in our history who had no experience in government whatsoever.
What we are going to do is combine experience with fresh thinking. But understand where the -- the vision for change comes from first and foremost. It comes from me. That's my job, is to provide a vision in terms of where we are going and to make sure, then, that my team is implementing it.

Obama's management of the 3 days before Thanksgiving and retail's traditional "Black Friday" sales events was reassuring. The amount of work that's already occurred which allowed him to stand up and assure the American people that his administration "hit the ground running." From Tuesday's press conference:

Given the extraordinary circumstances that we find ourselves in, however, I think it is very important for the American people to understand that we are putting together a first-class team and for them to have clarity that we don't intend to stumble into the next administration. We are going to hit the ground running. We're going to have clear plans of action. We intend to have the kind of economic recovery plan that is going to put 2.5 million people into jobs. We are going to make sure that we start focusing on energy, on health care, on revamping our education system so that it's competitive in the 21st century, and as I'm talking about today, that we are not going to back to business as usual when it comes to our budget.

When the 3 press conferences and the Q&A sessions are taken as a whole, they reveal a well-thought out plan for addressing the leadership issue during a most unusual time of transition. It's reassuring to see though there's still much turbulence to be navigated. And I know I'm in good company when Paul Krugman is pleased that "the grownups are coming" and Nouriel Roubini says, "The choices are excellent."

Happy Thanksgiving

2008-11-27T14:50:37Z

We baked the pumpkins on Tuesday and scooped them out. And then we made the pies from scratch yesterday: two pumpkin and one cherry. We toasted the pumpkin seeds too and made the cranberry sauce. Got up this morning and made the stuffing for the turkey and heaved it into the oven a little while ago. Later we'll make the mashed potatoes and the acorn squash and the corn and the brussel sprouts and of course, the gravy about which we'll have the family debate on whether it's better with mushrooms or without. We've discussed the paucity of "good" football games to watch. So while we wait for Thanksgiving dinner to appear, some of us are going for a hike in the park after my husband has cleared the last of the leaves that dared trespass on his arduously cleared lawn (last weekend's chore). We'll miss the family members that aren't here today but we're thankful that everyone is healthy and happy and safe where they are. There's much to be thankful for this year. And chief among them, is the election of a president who is approaching this time of crisis with the intelligence, forethought and vision that's been missing for so long. Happy Thanksgiving to you and yours, wherever you are, with whatever friends, family and strangers who become friends with whom you share this special day.

Items of Interest

2008-11-26T17:36:22Z

~ Check out this Visual Guide to the Financial Crisis. Per Barry Ritholz, it's missing a few causation items but it's well-done graphically. What were they thinking? ~ Want to see what the "common wisdom" on the election will look like? Go read Elizabeth Drew's article in the New York Review of Books, "The Truth About the Election". It's readable. It's fairly thorough. But I couldn't help feeling as I read it, that it was just too trite at some points. If I had more time to pull it apart, I'd highlight them but I'm not sure that it's worth the expenditure of time. In any case, it is an interesting read and no doubt, we'll see this view propagated in the traditional media. ~ Check out Ben Smith's capture of Peter Orszag's farewell post at the CBO blog. He also highlights Orszag's posts on health care at the CBO blog as worthy reading. ~ If this statement by Hamid Karzai is any indication, Afghanistan will be an even stickier mess to sort out. Not that we aren't all cognizant of its reputation as a generally ungovernable region of clans in competition, but having the leader of the democratic government we've supported, railing against the US and NATO doesn't bode well for future success. ~ Josh pointed out the Boston Globe picture book of the Obama campaign as the best of the bunch he's seen. It's good though I still like Callie Shell's amazing photo-journal of the entire Obama campaign the best. Just remember to keep clicking on "Show more images" at the bottom of whatever pictures you're looking at and keep scrolling down. ~ Another Obama story. A dkos poster from Indonesia reports on the conversation that Obama had with the Indonesian president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and how the Indonesian president reported it to the reporters around him.

When the presidential flight touched down at Nagoya airport in Japan on Tuesday, Yudhoyono made a statement to reporters over the airplane's intercom.
"He addressed me with, 'Apa Kabar Bapak President?' (How are you Mr. President?), with his fluent Indonesian language," Yudhoyono said. Obama was missing several local delicacies such as nasi goreng (fried rice), rambutan and bakso (meatball soup), he added. Yudhoyono had congratulated Obama's election as U.S. president and suggested he visit Indonesia after attending the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation meeting in Singapore next year.

The dkos poster Ajipon sums it up talking about how exciting it will be when Obama does visit Indonesia and how many thousands of people will turn out to cheer for him. It is interesting to reflect on our new President being at least somewhat conversant in the language of the country with the largest Muslim population in the world and anticipating how they will welcome him. What a welcome change.

Volcker Tapped for Advisory Role

2008-11-26T15:19:31Z

Headlining President-Elect Obama's third consecutive day of economic team rollout is Paul Volcker. Per the WSJ:

President-elect Barack Obama will appoint former Federal Reserve Chairman Paul Volcker on Wednesday to be the chairman of a new White House advisory board tasked with helping to lift the nation from recession and stabilize financial markets, Democratic officials say. [...]
The board's mission won't be to supplant the policy-making role of the Treasury Department and other agencies, but to give Mr. Obama an official forum for getting expert advice outside the normal bureaucratic channels. It will give briefings to the president. The panel, called the President's Economic Recovery Advisory Board, is modeled on the Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board established by then-President Dwight Eisenhower in 1956, at the height of the Cold War, when officials worried that that the existing bureaucratic structure was inadequate to help the U.S. keep pace with the Soviet threat. The financial crisis has drawn similar worries that the government isn't properly organized to monitor and respond to modern financial markets. [...] The board's tasks will be broad: to help design and implement short-term programs to jump-start the economy, raise wages and living standards and confront the housing crisis. It will also address the delicate task of bolstering Washington's oversight of the financial markets in the wake of a Wall Street collapse that has taken down many of its most venerable institutions.

I'm glad to see that Obama is going reap the benefit of Mr. Volcker's knowledge and leadership. This combined with the two prior economic team announcements puts out the notice that the Obama administration is organized and ready to go in a transition that is already remarkable in many ways. [via]

Just how big is the bailout?

2008-11-26T15:08:13Z

Barry Ritholz has found a way to bring a little reality to just how big the bailout may be. He notes that the current total cost, including the Citi bailout, "now exceeds $4.6165 trillion dollars".

People have a hard time conceptualizing very large numbers, so let's give this some context. The current Credit Crisis bailout is now the largest outlay In American history. Jim Bianco of Bianco Research crunched the inflation adjusted numbers. The bailout has cost more than all of these big budget government expenditures - combined:

• Marshall Plan: Cost: $12.7 billion, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $115.3 billion
• Louisiana Purchase: Cost: $15 million, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $217 billion
• Race to the Moon: Cost: $36.4 billion, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $237 billion
• S&L Crisis: Cost: $153 billion, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $256 billion
• Korean War: Cost: $54 billion, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $454 billion
• The New Deal: Cost: $32 billion (Est), Inflation Adjusted Cost: $500 billion (Est)
• Invasion of Iraq: Cost: $551b, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $597 billion
• Vietnam War: Cost: $111 billion, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $698 billion
• NASA: Cost: $416.7 billion, Inflation Adjusted Cost: $851.2 billion

TOTAL: $3.92 trillion

Just look at all the items added up and know that their sum is less than the current fiasco. That's a big number. [via] Here's another way to look at what's in the bailout, courtesy of the New York Times. Click on image for larger graphic.

Items of Interest

2008-11-24T21:21:57Z

-- Charles Homans at the Washington Monthly has an excellent post up on the extent of secret record-keeping within the Bush-Cheney administration and how much information has potentially been excluded by Bush's executive orders. The whole thing is worth reading to understand the impact of this point:

Cheney's papers are the Amazon rain forest of Bush administration records: they are of immense importance to the big picture, and there is a real risk that they will be lost before we know exactly what's in there.

TPMCafe is hosting a Special Features discussion this week on Homan's Washington Monthly article. Josh Marshall notes who's been invited to the discussion:

Scott Horton, New York attorney specializing in human rights law and the law of armed conflict, and regular contributor to Harper's; Suzanne Spaulding, lawyer specializing in national security issues, including homeland security, intelligence, and terrorism; Daniel Larison, Ph.D student at the University of Chicago and host of the blog, Eunomia; Mickey Edwards, former congressman (R-OK), lecturer at Princeton's Woodrow Wilson school, and Vice President of the Aspen Institute; Anne Weismann, Chief Counsel at Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington; and finally, Kate Martin, director of the Center for National Security Studies.

Here's Homan's first post, followed one by Daniel Larison of Eunomia. -- Jon Chait wrote an interesting piece in January 2007 about the US economy titled "Feast of the Wingnuts - How economic crackpots devoured American politics.". Another one of those people who should have been featured more prominently in our media. We were warned but we weren't listening. -- Unitary Moonbat has done another one of his terrific History for Kossacks posts and this time it's on Kenya. If you've not read one before, check out this highly readable nugget on the history, economy and politics of Kenya. If you're a history aficionado, check out the Progressive Historians blog where he posts along with other amateur (and some professional) historians. --Via Sully, more from The Man Who Got It Right, Peter Schiff. His outlook still isn't cheery.

-- For those interested in the designer of the Obama campaign signature logo, there's two articles about him and his now-famous design in the Philadelphia Daily News and the New York Times.

Obama on Economic Challenges and his Team

2008-11-24T19:35:35Z

President-Elect Obama introduced his economic team at noon today in Chicago and then took questions from the press. The first clip is his statement on the economic plans that they are developing for the nation. The second clip is the press Q&A portion. Staff bios and transcript of Obama's comments courtesy of Ben Smith.

And if you haven't seen it yet, here's President-Elect Obama's 11-22 Saturday address which also addresses the economic crisis:

Defeating the PR of Hate

2008-11-24T14:12:12Z

The editor and publisher of the Moroccan newsweekly magazines TelQuel and Nichane, Ahmed Benchemsi, has an interesting post in Newsweek about Obama and al Zawahri's video message last week. He makes three very good points. First:

The video message from Al Qaeda's No. 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri, in which he called Barack Obama a "house Negro," demonstrates, if anything, that the terrorists are always damn good in PR. You feel disgusted? Horrified? That's exactly their aim. In this regard, Zawahiri's diabolical comparison of Obama and Malcolm X ("an honorable American who converted to Islam," as Zawahiri put it) is an even bolder move: not only do they insult the American president-elect, but they rub it into one of America's deepest wounds--the racial divisions and the profound antagonisms generated by Malcolm X's radical claims. In terms of "hatred arts," this is just brilliant. Those who are shocked by Zawahiri's words have merely to remember: spreading hate is the terrorists' job. Hating you is not enough; they also need you to hate them, so the struggle goes on unchallenged.
Al Qaeda and all its followers badly need to perpetuate Samuel Huntington's "clash of civilizations" paradigm. The West and Islam are deadly enemies, in the radicals' view. The more irreconcilable the former, the happier the latter. In this regard, the agenda of Bush and the neocons was a true blessing for the terrorists.

His second point:

Al Qaeda's true problem with Obama has indeed nothing to do with the color of his skin. By proposing to meet Iran's Ahmadinejad without preconditions instead of just bombing him out, the American president-elect thinks outside of the confrontation box. The radicals just hate that. And above all, they hate the idea of the United States resuming the chase of Al Qaeda operatives in the mountains of the Pakistan-Afghanistan borders. He's coming to them, how could they not react fiercely?

And his third point which underscores Obama's transformational impact on the perception of America by non-citizens, and in particular, moderate Muslims in other countries of the world.

There is something else, which I witness everyday in the streets of Casablanca, where I live: Muslims tend to claim Obama as their own--because he's black, because he comes from an oppressed minority, because his middle name is Hussein. ... Not that they think Obama is a Muslim himself--he made clear that he was not. Yet he could have been. His father was. Anyway, this man looks like a "brother" to many Muslims, which is indeed a good thing for the prospect of global peace.
Not surprisingly, Zawahiri's video message targeted this specific point: "Obama is not a Muslim, he's a renegade who abandoned his ancestor's religion to embrace the 'crusaders faith' and the 'Zionists' ideology'," Zawahiri suggests. The genuine message being: please don't like him! Well, too bad for them: we do. We will like him more, of course, if he keeps his promise of backing out of Iraq within 16 months and putting the Israeli-Palestinian peace process back on track. Meanwhile, let's all of us, Muslims and Westerners, take advantage of the honeymoon period. And let's enjoy the terrorists' embarrassment: it's a rare occasion.

It's good to see a presumably moderate Muslim speaking out on the hate-mongering of al Qaeda and pointing out how Obama's approach undercuts it. We need more like him.

Items of Interest

2008-11-22T16:06:57Z

-- A MarketWatch post by Paul Farrell from March 2008 details the dangers of the derivatives market including a warning from Warren Buffett from 2002:

"In our view, ...derivatives are financial weapons of mass destruction, carrying dangers that, while now latent, are potentially lethal.

Both Buffett's 2002 warning and the March 2008 timestamp on the MarketWatch article highlight that there were people who saw this debacle coming. The last segment of Farrell's article tagged "World's newest and biggest 'black market'" is exceedingly clear in identifying what we've just seen unfold in September and October. The question is why weren't the financial and economic powers-that-be alert to this danger and taking steps to prevent it? Is greed the only answer? Stupidity? [via] -- The Economist comments on the Republican party's re-invention as "the stupid party". It's a pretty harsh assessment, though not undeserved. -- Nate Silver has an interesting thought piece on conservatives, the Republican party and how right-wing talk radio has contributed to their inability to persuade. -- Occams Hatchet has posted a pictorial tribute to the Bush presidency titled "The New Ozymandias" -- Via dkos, here's another cause worthy of support and at a minimum, an opportunity for insular Americans (and other world citizens) to educate themselves on how different life is for some people in our world. The post is titled "We Are All Pakistani Women Now." -- Via Ta-Nehisi, a celebration of our first geek president. Some samples of their wisdom:

Obama does not believe in interfandom fighting. Kirk versus Picard? Joel versus Mike (or the modern version, Cinematic Titanic versus Rifftrax)? He is above that. He wants to bring fandoms together, not tear them apart with fearmongering and wank.
Obama knows more Star Trek trivia than you ever will. He just doesn't see the need to talk about it and scare off the women. Obama would spend his time with Michelle and the girls whenever he came home from the campaign. And then would stay up all night watching MST3K episodes when they went to sleep. Obama does not buy into all this sparkly vampire bullshit. He does love Growing Up Cullen, though.

-- Ta-Nehisi gets it exactly right on Lieberman:

It's also amazing how "ending the partisanship" is always code for "I am right" when Lieberman is speaking, like crossing party-lines is somehow, in and of itself, valuable. Lieberman is an opportunist of the highest order. I understand why they didn't take him down yesterday--it really isn't Obama's way. My man is focused on getting shit done--I really believe that--not meting out justice. But there is a time and place for meting out justice. 2012. Connecticut.

Count on it. -- James Fallows praises Terry Gross for an interview that she conducted with Bill Ayers.

But a broadcast I just heard was not only a reminder that she is, in fact, truly a great interviewer but also a demonstration of what that means in practice. [...]
What she does instead, and what she shows brilliantly in this interview, is: she listens, and she thinks. In my experience, 99% of the difference between a good interviewer (or a good panel moderator) and a bad one lies in what that person is doing while the interviewee talks. If the interviewer is mainly using that time to move down to the next item on the question list, the result will be terrible. But if the interviewer is listening, then he or she is in position to pick up leads ("Now, that's an intriguing idea, tell us more about..."), to look for interesting tensions ("You used to say X, but now it sounds like..."), to sum up and give shape to what the subject has said ("It sounds as if you're suggesting..."). And, having paid the interviewee the respect of actually listening to the comments, the interviewer is also positioned to ask truly tough questions without having to bluster or insult. If you have this standard in mind -- is the interviewer really listening? and thinking? -- you will be shocked to see how rarely broadcast and on-stage figures do very much of either. But listen to this session by Gross to see how the thing should be done.

-- Also from James Fallows who's currently living in China:

Outsiders who follow Chinese events have known for years about Roland Soong's EastSouthWestNorth site*, which draws from Chinese-language and English-language sources for reports and analysis.
I've just seen this post, from a few days ago, which strikes me as something that people who don't normally follow Chinese events should know about. It's the text of a speech Soong prepared for last weekend's annual Chinese Bloggers conference (but did not deliver, for family-emergency reasons). In it, he discusses the differences the Internet has, and has not, made in the Chinese government's ability to control information and maintain power within China.

Commenting on the Real Economy

2008-11-22T14:08:16Z

NBBooks wrote this comment in a recent dkos diary. It deserves a little more attention than just that of a throw-away comment.

I was covering and writing about deregulation and financial derivatives back when one of the very few Congressmen to oppose the deregulation of the savings and loans, Texas Democrat Henry Gonzales was chairman of the House Banking Committee (read Molly Ivins' November 2000 obituary of Gonzalez here) and Richard Breeden was chairman of the SEC. Many of you probably know the general outline of the history of these issues the past 30 years. But in the late 80s to mid-90s, I was in some of the hearings where these ideas were debated in the Congress, in the SEC and CFTC and in some of the think tanks back in the late 1980s and early 1990s. I saw how Wall Street got its way over and over and over again.

For me, opposing Wall Street came down to one central idea - it's the real economy that's important, and the banking and financial system should always be kept in a position of subservience to it. It's the real economy that produces and distributes the food we eat, the clothes we wear, the houses we live in, the cars and buses and trains and planes we ride in. The real economy provides what people need to survive; by contrast, you can't eat a debenture or a bond. And in the 1980s, the real economy, as I saw it, was being sacrificed to and looted by the banking and financial system.

Does anyone remember "It doesn't matter whether we produce potato chips or computer chips" ? I was among the Cassandras that were shouted down when we tried to warn such foolishness would bankrupt our country. Yeah, too damn bad we had to wait twenty years to show you the proof.

The financial catastrophe that has occurred under George W. Bush is only the logical result of the "post industrial" policy trends of the past three decades, but some people still don't get it. I find it hard to believe there are people, so called "progessives," here - here of all places! - that are in favor of allowing the auto industry and at least one million working class jobs to disappear.

No one I have seen yet has challenged the estimates that a million jobs would be lost to begin with. Some estimates go as high as three million jobs lost. It will take years, and millions of lives lost to despair, hopelessness, misery, and the amplified affects of deteriorating mental and physical health, before we would climb out of this disaster.

Yet, many people appear anxious to pay this extravagant price. To punish auto's management for making bad decisions. To punish industrial workers for abandoning the Democrats and supporting Reagan and both Bushes. To punish organized labor for making more money than they do.

To punish mankind for having the arrogance to tame and harness nature so that ninety percent of kids no longer die before they're five years old.

What stupidity. What short-sighted, unthinking, vengeful moronbasity.

Well, people who have had their heads up their ass for the past twenty years, are about to have their asses handed to them. Too bad the innocent are going to get the same treatment.

I left my journalistic position in 1996, feeling very tired, belittled, jaded, cynical, and completely marginalized. Meanwhile Wall Street led the country on a tear of false prosperity that my fellow Americans can now see was nothing but debt, debt, debt, piled on more debt. This is my "I told you so," moment, but what effing good does it do?

What I can do that might do some good is to tell you what I think is coming next.

The Obama administration will spend around 12 to 24 months try to find a solution to the new world depression within the confines of neo-liberal economic thought.

Meanwhile the suffering and misery is going to get worse, and worse, and worse. The Rethugs will be grinning from ear to ear.

I'm hoping the street organizer in Obama will come to the fore at that point, and we can begin to crack down on the financial markets and their addiction to hot money. In other words, saving the real economy is going to require destroying all the offshore tax havens and imposing a tax on financial transactions that chases out short-term speculation.

Basically, we are either going to force the financial system to eat the losses of its deflated bubbles, or the financial system is going to force us to cut wages, pensions, Social Security, national healthcare and the standard of living.

Most people, including Obama I fear, don't understand this yet. We are going to waste a year or two floundering about trying to avoid both massive economic pain and panicking the markets, before we finally figure out it is impossible to do both.

I hope that his conclusion about Obama's team is not true but his point about the auto-makers and the real economy is very important. As he put it, there is a huge difference between potato chips and computer chips, and the loss of potentially 3 million jobs related to the auto industry is not an acceptable option. Once people understand that, this should no longer be a discussion about the foolishness of auto-industry CEOs but a focus on rebuilding the real economy in the US.

TNR: Why the Geithner Pick Is Even Better Than You Think

2008-11-22T13:34:13Z

Noam Scheiber has an interesting post at TNR's The Stump on why Tim Geithner is a great choice as Treasury Secretary.

Geithner is one of the most able technocrats to have risen through Treasury's ranks, which makes him the perfect pick to run its sprawling bureaucracy; Summers is one of the top two or three economic minds of his generation, which makes him a guy you want in the room with the president.
But, beyond the pairing of person and job, it's the way these guys complement one another that's really key here. Geithner is the rare bureaucrat with the smarts and the self-confidence to effectively challenge Summers when he's off base. [...] The two men also developed an incredibly effective good cop/bad cop routine, which I'm guessing they might reprise:
Summers was the bad cop--the outspoken sheriff with strong views about how to structure the international financial system. Geithner was his antidote--a master of process and protocol and Treasury's ambassador to global forums like the G-7.

Scheiber goes onto speculate on how the team of Geithner as Treasury Secretary and Summers as chief economic adviser will divide the labor. It's interesting, and if it comes to pass, promising.

Al Jazeera English reports

2008-11-20T19:13:45Z

Sometime ago I subscribed to the Al Jazeera English channel on youtube. It is interesting to see world news coverage from their perspective. Here's a selection from their coverage of the last 5 days. The last one called Street Food (2 parts) is absolutely fascinating -- a bit of history, current events, tourist, and culinary taste trip through Mumbai all in one. Just imagine some of this coverage on US media channels. -- Al Jazeera English reports (video) on the tearing down of a Hare Krishna temple and dispossession of land in Kazakhstan.

Human rights groups have put Kazakhstan in the spot light for its treatment of religious minority groups.
A long running dispute between the authorities and Hare Krishna followers could end with the destruction of the country's only Hindu temple. Robin Forestier Walker reports from Kazakhstan.

-- More reporting from Al Jazeera English on South Korea's "Fighters for a Free North Korea" activists. It's an interesting story.

-- The story on voting in Kashmir, India -- a part of Al Jazeera's Inside Story series.

Voters in Indian-administered Kashmir started heading for the polls on Monday, November 17, amid tight security. Voting for the 87 assembly seats comprising the state government is being held in seven stages until December 24, 2008.
So far, around 55 per cent of Indian-controlled Kashmir's 6.4 million strong electorate have turned out to vote, including many Muslims, who separatists and rebels are urging to boycott the elections to protest against New Delhi's hold over the Himalayan region. Indian-administered Kashmir was put under direct federal rule in July, after the state government collapsed following its controversial decision to donate land in to a Hindu pilgrim trust. About 70 per cent of the region's population is Muslim. This year has seen some of the biggest anti-India protests in the Kashmir Valley since an insurgency began in 1989.

Part 1 --

Part 2 --

-- Al Jazeera English reports on how the world financial credit crisis has impacted Hungary's economy.

-- Street Food: "In the first of a new series Al Jazeera's Divya Gopalan attempts to understand the real Mumbai by taking a culinary journey through its Street Food." Part 1

Part 2