Sunday, October 26, 2008

From our friends at the WashPost

At the U.N., Many Hope for an Obama Win

By Colum LynchWashington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, October 26, 2008; A17

UNITED NATIONS -- There are no "Obama 2008" buttons, banners or T-shirts visible here at U.N. headquarters, but it might be difficult to find a sliver of territory in the United States more enthusiastic over the prospect of the Illinois senator winning the White House.

An informal survey of more than two dozen U.N. staff members and foreign delegates showed that the overwhelming majority would prefer that Sen. Barack Obama win the presidency, saying they think that the Democrat would usher in a new agenda of multilateralism after an era marked by Republican disdain for the world body.

Obama supporters hail from Russia, Canada, France, Britain, Germany, the Netherlands, Sierra Leone, South Africa, Indonesia and elsewhere. One American employee here seemed puzzled that he was being asked whether Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) was even a consideration. "Obama was and is unstoppable," the official said. "Please, God, let him win," he added.

"It would be hard to find anybody, I think, at the U.N. who would not believe that Obama would be a considerable improvement over any other alternative," said William H. Luers, executive director of the United Nations Association. "It's been a bad eight years, and there is a lot of bad feeling over it."

Conservatives who are skeptical of the United Nations said they are not surprised by the political tilt. "The fact is that most conservatives, most Republicans don't worship at the altar in New York, and I think that aggravates them more than anything else," said John R. Bolton, a former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. "What they want is the bending of the knee, and they'll get it from an Obama administration."

The candidates have said little about their plans for the United Nations, but Obama has highlighted his desire to pursue diplomacy more assertively than the Bush administration, whereas McCain has called for the establishment of a league of democracies, which many here fear is code for sidelining the United Nations.

U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon has avoided showing a public preference about the presidential campaign -- although he has hinted at a soft spot for Obama in private gatherings, according to U.N. officials. His top advisers say they think McCain and Obama would support many of Ban's priorities, including restraints on production of greenhouse gases that fuel climate change.

"The secretary general and the Secretariat of the United Nations take no position on the U.S. election," said Ban's chief spokeswoman, Michele Montas. "The secretary general deeply respects the democratic process, and he looks forward to working with whomever the American people choose."

Many U.N. rank and file are less circumspect, saying they see in Obama's multicultural background -- a Kenyan father, an Indonesian stepfather and a mother and grandparents from Kansas -- a reflection of themselves. "We do not consider him an African American," said Congo's U.N. ambassador, Atoki Ileka. "We consider him an African."

read the rest

Friday, October 10, 2008

An Open Letter to John McCain

An Open Letter to John McCain

By Joseph Sigalas

I write this letter as the father of three young children, girls who have become highly enthusiastic about the presidential race. Of course they’re rooting for you because their mother and I are. But down deep I know that the victory they are rooting for will result in a far better country and a better future than they are likely to get from Obama.

But we have to get there first. To do that we’re going to need something different from your team. You will have to stop missing opportunities to win over the winnable middle.

I don’t claim to have all the answers, but the following seven-point plan outlines at least some of what you have to do:

Distinguish yourself once and for all from President Bush. The attempts to pin him on you is to ignore the last eight years of direct conflict between you and the President. Among the most striking: You were in favor of having more troops in Iraq well ahead of President Bush. He did eventually sign on and push ahead with “The Surge.” But all of that was him catching up with you. Give him credit for coming around. But it was you who openly and heatedly argued at the time—and against the Administration—that we should have sent more troops to Iraq in the first place.

Stop letting Obama get away with saying he was “right” on not going into Iraq . His “rightness” about our not being welcomed as liberators must have been based on personal clairvoyance; it wasn’t based on the intelligence available at the time. Being right in hindsight is awfully easy. You need to point out that constantly taking credit for what amounted to luck (for Obama, not Saddam) and 20/20 hindsight reveals not “good judgment” but rather a character that may have trouble resisting the urge to reshape the truth.

Point out, publicly and persistently, that the chief problem with Obama’s position on Iraq was that he was willing to lose. As Robert McFarlane wrote in the Wall Street Journal last week, he acted as if losing was something America could take in stride, apparently just as he imagines we did with Vietnam . But I know personally: That narrative is false. Not only did we lose prestige in the world and embolden our enemies by allowing a numerous but politically immature generation to drive foreign policy and force us to abandon our friends—as certainly would have happened had we “strategically redeployed” from Iraq—but we also betrayed another group of people, people just a little younger than the so-called “boomers.” Those people, myself included, came of age post-Vietnam. That American “loss”—not to mention Watergate—handed us an America we were made to feel ashamed of, or at least vaguely embarrassed about. For many people my age, patriotism was “uncool,” lame or (more likely) just beside the point. Yes, the U.S. accomplished the lunar landing in 1969. But most of those I’m talking about were too young (I was only six) to fully appreciate that event, and Vietnam and later Watergate soon pushed all that off the front pages for years to come.

The point is, losing the war in Iraq would have the unintended consequence of alienating a whole new generation. That’s not the America I want to hand down to my daughters.

Attack Congress’s numerous and persistent failures. That’s a tough spot for you, but it has to be done. You must point out what those of us paying attention already know: Congressional Democrats routinely create a “disaster” only then to suggest themselves as the solution.

Do not let the American people forget that Congress has been in Democratic hands since 2006. And where have they been? Reid, Pelosi, Frank and Company’s recent accomplishments amount to little more than this:

Obstructing victory in Iraq by pre-declaring American failure;
Recklessly and deliberately creating a sense of economic despair for eight years; their “success” is now exacerbating the recent crisis;
Dragging their feet on drilling last summer, going home (to raise money) because, according to Pelosi, that just wasn’t Congress’s problem.

As for Obama, he was just “phoning it in” regarding the bailout issue—at least until President Bush called him.

The Democrats’ Congressional record is one of relentless failure. Call them out on it.

Explain, in plain and simple terms, how your tax plan will save and increase jobs—and how Obama’s plan to raise taxes on “big business” (those with incomes over $250K) will result in job cuts. Potentially massive job cuts. His plan will raise taxes on the very companies that employ thousands of Americans. For instance, according to cbsnews.com, InBev—the company that recently bought Anheuser-Busch, which includes American-icon company Budweiser—“has tried to soothe American fears of job losses by promising to keep open all 12 North American breweries… as long as the company did not face extra U.S. taxes.” This story goes right to the point. If companies have to pay more taxes, they will either leave altogether or be forced to lay off employees, back off on benefits, and, ultimately, pass costs on to consumers. No matter how Obama tries to parse it, we all lose. And by the way—if Obama wins, you can bet many people won’t like their rolled-back benefits. They’ll sign up for the government-backed plan in droves (until we bankrupt that system, too).

Do not let Americans in the middle forget Senator Obama’s cultural elitism and “celebrity” status. Just saying that he’s “liberal” is not nearly enough. Remind us that Hollywood and New York celebrities, academics, trial lawyers, the mainstream media and others who consistently attack traditional America and those who love it adore him. Remind us of his grating, condescending “clinging to their guns and religion” comment. Like the elitist cocktail set to which he belongs, he imagines that he knows best and that those who don’t agree are a bunch a ignorant, racist yahoos.

Last but not least:

Communicate authentic optimism about America . You must do this above all. Tell us in concrete terms that everything will be all right. Don’t give us false hope; show us there IS hope. That’s what I’ll vote for. Aside from cutting taxes, what should we—not just the government, but ALL of us—do? What version of America should we steer toward? That’s what the ideal president would tell us. Point the way in specific terms. Become the president by acting like a president. Right now.

In short: Give us clear reasons to vote for you. Make those reasons shine through the political and media fog. Talk over the media’s heads—straight to us.

As of tonight, 26 days remain until the election. You still have some time to make changes that may make all the difference. For all our sakes, Senator McCain, make them now.

We must not hand my daughters, your grandchildren, and children across the U.S. a self-doubting, self-reproaching nation that has become habitually ashamed of itself. All of that is to brood on the past. Sir, show us the future.

Commentary and Questions on Politics, Education, Christianity, Literature, and More