Restitutor Orbis

President Obama's weekly address:


1/31/09: Your Weekly Address from White House on Vimeo.

This was an interesting development, reported by Yahoo News:

NEW YORK – Most Republican governors have broken with their GOP colleagues in Congress and are pushing for passage of President Barack Obama's economic aid plan that would send billions to states for education, public works and health care.

Their state treasuries drained by the financial crisis, governors would welcome the money from Capitol Hill, where GOP lawmakers are more skeptical of Obama's spending priorities.

The most interesting aspect of this story is that Sarah Palin was among those pressing for release of her state's share of the recovery package.

From the White House blog dated January 30th, a last bit of news from yesterday:

America's middle class is the economic engine of this nation. Our road to economic recovery begins with restoring the prosperity of working families and small business owners. That is why today, President Obama signed a Presidential Memorandum creating a task force dedicated to raising the living standards of middle class families – and he put the nation’s number two guy in charge, Vice President Joe Biden:

"America’s middle class is hurting. Trillions of dollars in home equity and retirement savings and college savings are gone. And every day, more and more Americans are losing their jobs. President Obama and I are determined to change this. Quite simply, a strong middle class equals a strong America. We can’t have one without the other. This Task Force will be an important vehicle to assess new and existing policies across the board and determine if they are helping or hurting the middle class. It is our charge to get the middle class – the backbone of this country – up and running again."

President Obama went on to say the following:

I'm going to be signing three executive orders designed to ensure that federal contracts serve taxpayers efficiently and effectively. One of these orders is going to prevent taxpayer dollars from going to reimburse federal contractors who spend money trying to influence the formation of unions. We will also require that federal contractors inform their employees of their rights under the National Labor Relations Act. Federal labor laws encourage collective bargaining, and employees should know their rights to avoid disruption of federal contracts.

And I'm issuing an order so that qualified employees will be able to keep their jobs even when a contract changes hands. We shouldn't deprive the government of these workers who have so much experience in making government work.

Vice President Joe Biden made a few remarks as well:

And our first task force meeting will be held in -- on February 27th in Philadelphia. The focus of that meeting will be green jobs -- those jobs that pay well, can't be outsourced, and will help us move toward a cleaner, more self-sufficient energy future. Each month to follow, we will focus on a different concern in a different part of the country: how to make retirement more secure; child and elder care, how to make it affordable; improving workplace safety; getting the cost of college within reach of the vast majority of the American people; help weary parents juggle family and work; and create the jobs for the future.

All in all, very exciting news. I was hoping President Obama would find useful and meaningful employment for Biden and I know that's what Biden wanted.

A last bit of news from CNN:

After initially vowing to unveil a new financial rescue package this coming week, senior Obama administration officials are now pushing the rollout date back an extra week in a sign of just how difficult it may be to craft such a massive plan — especially while the White House is simultaneously trying to sell a separate $819 economic stimulus plan.

Two senior administration officials told CNN that the full rescue plan, which is being put together by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and other top economic advisers, is now expected to be unveiled the second week of February. But the officials held out the possibility that Geithner could start teasing out some aspects of the rescue plan this coming week.

Officials said the rescue plan will include a crackdown on bonuses and other compensation for companies that receive federal bailout money.

The war between Rush Limbaugh and President Obama seems to be heating up and it is possible there is more to it than meets the eye. Our new president is clearly no intellectual slouch and he has already shown a great capacity to plan ahead, to be prepared for every contingency. We may be seeing more of that now. I just saw this in the Huffington Post:
Media critic Michael Wolff thinks Limbaugh is just being played by Obama:

Right now Rush is being played. The Obama dinner with conservative columnists, shortly before his inauguration, was as much about excluding Rush as coddling the columnists. Not only did the conservatives fawn, but Rush fumed. It got under his skin. Indeed, the rumor that he might in fact be there (likely coming from the Obama camp), and then his evident lack of an invitation, highlighted the slight. He's tried to make it out to be a political point ever since, but mostly he sounds like a guy who's hurt he didn't get invited to the hot party.

HuffPo also reports that Politico reports (why do they do this, it drives me mad) that "Republican House member Phil Gingrey has a message for Limbaugh: back off.

"I think that our leadership, Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, are taking the right approach," Gingrey said. "I mean, it's easy if you're Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh or even sometimes Newt Gingrich to stand back and throw bricks. You don't have to try to do what's best for your people and your party. You know you're just on these talk shows and you're living well and plus you stir up a bit of controversy and gin the base and that sort of that thing. But when it comes to true leadership, not that these people couldn't be or wouldn't be good leaders, they're not in that position of John Boehner or Mitch McConnell."

This seems to be a shared sentiment. On the radio Monday, Limbaugh said Obama wished the same for him (to fail).

"He's obviously more frightened of me than he is Mitch McConnell. He's more frightened of me, then he is of say, John Boehner, which doesn't say much about our party," Limbaugh said.

The HuffPo headline Obama Allies use Limbaugh to Hammer GOP on Stimulus seems to be right on and it would appear that Rush has Obama right where Obama wants him. He has certainly played into Democrat hands. While some liberals oppose giving Rush any air-time at all (even to refute him) I applaud the strategy (along with the petition hosted by the Democratic National Committee). If you let the other party control the terms of the debate, you also let them control its outcome. Rush has gone unanswered for too many years, spreading too much propaganda, for it to go unanswered. This is what HuffPo had to say yesterday:

Key Democratic groups are launching a series of radio advertisements on Friday designed to tie Republicans to Rush Limbaugh and put pressure on GOP Senators to support the stimulus package.

MoveOn, Americans United for Change, AFSCME and SEIU are releasing the spots in three states with Senate Republicans who could potentially switch party lines on the stimulus vote: George Voinovich in Ohio, John Ensign in Nevada, and Arlen Specter in Pennsylvania. The ads are designed to drum up support for the president's economic recovery package. But they do so in somewhat of a round-about manner, not just touting the jobs that could be created from the bill but tying Republicans to some of Limbaugh's most caustic and controversial anti-Obama comments.

Finally, I'd like to point to a great Op-Ed piece in the New York Times, by Paul Krugman, Health Care Now. Krugman asks a very critical question, one for which there is no answer at this point:

Why has the Obama administration been silent, at least so far, about one of President Obama’s key promises during last year’s campaign — the promise of guaranteed health care for all Americans?

If anything ever proves the old adage that a picture is worth 10,000 words it is this piece, by PunditKitchen.com:


see Sarah Palin pictures

Who doesn't want a president with an inner Samuel L. Jackson?

Update 8:09PM: This just in from FOX news, a bit of good news to offset the less happy vents of the day:

The chairman of the Senate banking committee claimed Thursday that he would "look at every possible legal means" to recover billions in bonuses to Wall Street executives, after President Obama called the bonuses plain "outrageous."

The president reacted harshly Thursday to reports that corporate employees got paid more than $18 billion in bonuses last year.

"That is the height of irresponsibility. It is shameful," he said.

Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., released a statement saying: "I'm demanding that the Treasury Department figure out some way to get this money back."

Finally some bad news coming out of the Obama Administration. Funding was included in the House's version of the stimulus package for Bush's unconstitutional "Faith Based Initiative." I earlier sent a letter to my senator to urge the Senate to remove this part of the bill. But this is not the end of the story. I just received the following from Americans United for Separation of Church and State:

Media outlets reported today that President Barack Obama will name Joshua DuBois, a Pentecostal minister who did religious outreach during the campaign, to head a revamped White House office of “faith-based” initiatives.

The Rev. Barry W. Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, called on Obama to act quickly to overturn executive orders and other policies from the Bush administration that undercut civil rights and civil liberties.

“I urge President Obama and his staff to work expeditiously to fix several glaring problems with the ‘faith-based’ initiative,” Lynn said. “Time is of the essence. Every day the initiative operates under Bush-era rules is another day rights are violated and tax money is squandered.”

Lynn said the Obama administration should work to implement a series of recommendations the new president made in July. During a speech in Zanesville, Ohio, Obama vowed to end taxpayer-funded job bias in faith-based programs, forbid proselytizing in these programs and subject them to oversight to make sure they are effective.

Clearly, this is a mistake of epic proportions. If Church and State are separate, how can the State appoint anyone to oversee anything that is not, according to the Constitution, in any way within the purview of the federal government?

According to the UPI, "The White House declined to comment."

I hope the news is not true. It will be a huge disappointment if Obama does indeed appoint a "religious czar." We have enough czars already, and frankly, I'd like to see the term done away with, given its unhappy connotations.

On another front, as I reported last night, the stimulus package was approved by the House and must now face the Senate. The New York Times observes that while

While the House and Senate measures are similar, they are most likely to differ in ways that could snarl negotiations between Democrats from the two chambers, and delay getting a measure to the president. In particular, House and Senate Democrats are split over how to divide $87 billion in relief to the states for Medicaid, with senators favoring a formula more beneficial to less-populous states.

Democrats’ own differences aside, they also are under pressure from the White House to be open to proposals from Senate Republicans who might support the final legislation if their interests are accommodated, and which might draw a few Republican supporters on a final vote next month in the House.

The New York Times this morning had a piece about Obama's style, including his overturning Bush's dress code - the President and his staff have been photographed working in the Oval Office sans jacket. Scandalous! The article also discussed his work habits:

Although his presidency is barely a week old, some of Mr. Obama’s work habits are already becoming clear. He shows up at the Oval Office shortly before 9 in the morning, roughly two hours later than his early-to-bed, early-to-rise predecessor. Mr. Obama likes to have his workout — weights andcardio — first thing in the morning, at 6:45. (Mr. Bush slipped away to exercise midday.)

He reads several papers, eats breakfast with his family and helps pack his daughters, Malia, 10, and Sasha, 7, off to school before making the 30-second commute downstairs — a definite perk for a man trying to balance work and family life. He eats dinner with his family, then often returns to work; aides have seen him in the Oval Office as late as 10 p.m., reading briefing papers for the next day.

Finally, on the diplomacy front, Reuters reports that

Officials in U.S. President Barack Obama's administration are drafting a letter to Iran from the president aimed at unfreezing relations and opening the way for direct talks, Britain's Guardian newspaper reported on Thursday.

The U.S. State Department has been working on drafts of the letter since Obama was elected last November, the report said. It was a response to a letter of congratulations sent by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad after Obama's poll victory.

The letter gives assurances that Washington does not want to overthrow the Iranian administration, but instead seeks changes in its behavior, the paper said. It would be addressed to the Iranian people and sent directly to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, or released as an open letter.

Update: 10:54PM CBS News is reporting that "The House of Representatives late Wednesday passed President Barack Obama's $819 billion plan to stimulate the economy and curtail the nation's year-old recession. The 244-188 vote proceeded along party lines as expected. Only 12 Democrats opposed the measure, and no Republicans supported it."



The House of Representatives votes on the stimulus package today. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., on Tuesday called the bill "most critical piece of legislation [Congress] will consider this session." Democrats have an overwhelming majority in the House so it will pass without difficulty. Obama reached out to House Republicans yesterday but they seem primarily interesting in imposing their already failed policies on Obama. After all, if it didn't work in eight years, maybe four more will do the trick. That seems to be their thinking. Obama tried, apparently they were impressed by the gesture, but it will have no effect in the long-term because apparently most if not all of them will vote against the package. Obama on the meeting:

"I don't expect 100% agreement from my Republican colleagues, but I hope that we can put politics aside...The main message I have is that the statistics every day underscore the urgency of the economic situation," the president said. "The American people expect action."

Of course, the House is only phase 1. Next comes the Senate. On Tuesday, CNN reports,

key Senate committees took up the Senate's separate but similar version of the bill. Next week, the full Senate will vote on its version. Should both the Senate and House pass different versions, the two bills would have to be conferenced together. Then, both chambers would have to vote on the new, conferenced version in the coming weeks.

MSNBC reported last night that the final form of the bill will likely be what Obama wants, despite Republican opposition, which is spreading disinformation and sometimes making things up in a desperate attempt to derail the package. It won't work. Obama has the highest approval rating of any incoming American president in history. Those who seek to obstruct him are, at present, swimming against the tide. So whatever the opposition, reports are that the deal will be done by the mid-February deadline. There are things in the package that can legitimately be quibbled with, and it's clear that the boost to the economy will not be immediate (Republicans claim their suggestions will lead to immediate improvement, though how that can be claimed given that their policies put us here in the first place, is anyone's guess. Ideology is blind, after all).

A final thought for the day. I was reading a report from Gallup called "State of the States: Political Party Affiliation".


The caption for this map reads:

The accompanying map shows party strength by state for 2008, ranging from states that can be considered solidly Democratic (a Democratic advantage in party identification of 10 percentage points or more) to those that can be considered solidly Republican (a Republican advantage in party identification of 10 percentage points or more). States in which the partisan advantage is less than 5 points in either direction are considered "competitive."

The implications, argue the Gallup site, are that "The political landscape of the United States has clearly shifted in the Democratic direction, and in most states, a greater proportion of state residents identified as Democrats or said they leaned to the Democratic Party in 2008 than identified as Republicans or leaned Republican."

Obama gave an interview Monday with Al Arabiya TV, offering a new face of America to Arabs and Muslims. Obama made it clear that the US would remain friends and allies of Israel but he offered an olive branch of Islamic nations and expressed concern for the welfare of the Palestinian people. Significantly, this was his first television interview, and it was not given to domestic networks but to an Arab network seen by tens of millions of Muslims.


CNN reports that

Obama's interview was seen widely in Pakistan and has received a generally positive response from analysts there. Islamabad author and journalist Imtiaz Gul told CNN: "It's a good sign of an attempt to reconcile with the Muslim world, to say America wants to reach out to them and not to consider them as an enemy."

Another piece I saw today was from Frontal 21, a German newsmagazine, which had a report about the misdeeds of the Bush Administration, specifically, in this case, torture and human rights abuses. This piece argues that legally, Obama is bound to prosecute Bush.



I don't think we can ignore Obama's governing style in the decisions he's made and is yet to make. Bush seemed to govern either according to an ideological play-book or on intuition, and he surrounded himself with a staff of "yes men". Facts had to conform to ideology and unpleasant facts had to be legislated out of existence, ignored, or reinterpreted so as to no longer present a problem. It's no wonder that the Bush foreign policy decisions of the past eight years led to so many problems and even debacles.

But as a January 20th article in the New York Times points out, Obama is a different sort of president. He actually likes divergent opinions. He actually likes facts. He is willing to entertain opposing voices before coming to an informed decision.

What the country has seen of his leadership style so far evokes the discipline of George W. Bush and the curiosity of Bill Clinton. Mr. Obama is not shy about making decisions and making them expeditiously — he assembled his team in record time — but he has also sought to tap into the nation’s intellectual dialogue at a time of great ferment...“He sort of lives in a grudge-free zone,” said John D. Podesta, a co-chairman of his transition team. “He’s capable of taking on board a lot of information and making good decisions. He knows he’s going to make mistakes. But he also knows that you’ve got to do the best you can, make tough decisions and move on.”

It is refreshing to have somebody in charge who can and will look at the world unblinkered by ideological predispositions. The world is a dangerous place and ideology only makes it more so. The world is not a simple place and ideology does not allow for levels of complexity. But as the New York Times reports,

“I don’t think it maps into traditional right-left, but nor is it Bill Clinton-like triangulation,” said Robert B. Reich, Mr. Clinton’s labor secretary and an economic adviser to Mr. Obama. “My sense is he genuinely believes that people can come to a rough consensus about big problems and work together effectively. I don’t really get a sense of ideological position. He’s obviously a man of strong convictions, but they don’t fall into the standard boxes.”

They are starting to refer to Obama as a "post-partisan" president for his efforts to work across the aisles and to include opponents in the debate and decision-making process. This president wants consensus, not "us" vs. "them." To that end, he has dropped the $200 million that was supposed to go towards contraceptives in the new stimulus bill. This is a concession to Republicans, though they are no doubt claiming some sort of ideological victory. In the end, Obama does not really need the Republicans to pass the bill, which should be enough proof of his sincerity to find that consensus when he meets with Republicans at a luncheon on Capitol Hill today (CNN is saying that today "Obama tests his bipartisan potential"). The Republicans are apparently claiming that the Democrats are Obama's true problem, hinting that they are not in lock-step with the president (Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky on the TODAY show this morning), but these reports are patently false. In fact, six Republicans crossed the aisle to vote for Obama's request to have the remaining $350 billion from the first stimulus package released to him last week.

MSNBC reports that "House Republicans have drafted an alternative. Except for an extension of unemployment benefits, it consists exclusively of tax cuts." Not surprising; and not very helpful either. For eight years they've had what they wanted, and now, as a minority, they want to dictate to the majority, after a popular vote utterly rejected their failed policies, what we should do now in this economic crisis their policies created. Fascinating.

I will save the best for last. ABC news is reporting that "The high-flying execs at Citigroup caved under pressure from President Obama and decided today to abandon plans for a luxurious new $50 million corporate jet from France." Given that the taxpayers have forked over $45 billion to Citigroup to bail them out, it seems particularly obscene to buy the plane from France when at least buying one from the US would have helped US industry and by extension, US workers.

The decision came 24 hours after the banking giant, which was rescued by a $45 billion taxpayer lifeline, defended buying the state-of-the-art Dassault Falcon 7X -- one of nine to be flying in U.S. skies -- as a smart business deal.

The jet, the epitome of corporate prestige and privilege, can carry 12 passengers in elegant comfort.

ABC News has learned that on Monday officials of the Obama administration called Citigroup about the company's new $50 million corporate jet and told execs to "fix it."

A full week of Obama's presidency has gone by, and it's been the most enjoyable week of the past eight years. In fact, I don't think I've been this happy since Clinton was president. If Bush hadn't done all in his power to bring America to her knees, I'd be even happier. But as I've been saying, at least we have hope now.

Speaking of Bush, Obama is now facing some hard work fixing the breakdown of environmental protections weakened and, in places, outright destroyed by Bush's maliciousness.

Time Magazine reports

when it comes to environmental regulations, he's still in the grip of yesterday. In his last few months in office, former President George W. Bush's Administration pushed through over 150 "midnight regulations," many of them weakening existing environmental protections. Although Obama is now in charge, most of Bush's new rules are on the books, and changing them will take time and effort from an already burdened White House. "The Obama Administration will be saddled with reversing harmful Bush rules at the same time that Obama wants to enact his own agenda," says John Walke, a senior attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).

Time observers that "The Obama Administration isn't completely helpless. As the President, Obama of course can push through regulations of his own, but that can take months."

That said, Obama has already made at least one important move: MSNBC reports that

President Barack Obama is poised to let California and other states set their own more stringent auto emission standards in their drive to slash greenhouse gases, an official familiar with the decision said Sunday.

. This is great news. I well remember how angry I was when Bush denied California's request for a waiver. It seemed small minded and mean spirited. Obama, however, is made of better stuff. As MSNBC notes, "he move is significant on two fronts: It could empower states to set tougher standards in targeting emissions, which are blamed for contributing to global climate change."

Obama is also expected to direct the Transportation Department to get moving on rules for automakers to improve fuel economy. A 2007 law requires that by 2020 new cars and trucks meet 35 miles per gallon, a 40 percent increase over current standards. The Bush administration ended its tenure before putting the new fuel-economy rules in place.

I would love to see Bush prosecuted for all his crimes against America and against the American people. The world, I think, should have to get in line and have whatever is left of him when we're through. I don't know if that will happen, but it needs to be done. We can't let a president do the things Bush has done ever again.

Finally, MSNBC reports that "The president on Monday is also expected to tout proposals that he says would boost clean energy supplies while also producing badly needed jobs in so-called "green" industries."

Hopefully, this will not include "clean coal" which is a canard if there ever was one. There is no such thing as recent troubles in Tennessee.

A final bit of news today: The Senate voted today to confirm Tim Geithner as the next treasury secretary. He was sworn in by Joe Biden. He appears to be the best man for the job, and he promises far better oversight on the stimulus money than previously displayed by Bush's people.

We are nearly at the end of Obama's first week in office. These have been momentous days, pregnant with hope and promises fulfilled. Most significant of all the changes Obama has brought to the presidency is his willingness to embrace diplomacy. And this openness, this willingness to talk before shooting, is already bearing fruit. According to the Associated Press,

Fidel Castro is said to like the new American leader, and North Korea and Iran both sounded open to new ideas to defuse nuclear-tinged tensions...Iran still considers the U.S. the "Great Satan," but a day after Obama was sworn in, it said it was "ready for new approaches by the United States." Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said his country would study the idea of allowing the U.S. to open a diplomatic office in Tehran, the first since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

I have been reading a very compelling book, David Kilcullen, The Accidental Guerilla (Oxford, 2009), who points to the problems long plaguing US relations with Iran. I have to wonder if Obama isn't familiar with Kilcullen, who served General Petraeus in Iraq as Senior Counterinsurgency Advisor. This is what Kilcullen has to say:

There is a certain amount of irrationality in our Iran policy, arising in part from the experiences of the U.S. Embassy hostage crisis in Tehran in 1979-80...There is baggage on both sides, of course; some Iranians remember the U.S.-led overthrow of the Mossadeq government in 1953 with equally vivid bitterness while others, opposed to the current regime, blame America for the revolution of 1979. This baggage sometimes makes American policy-makers reluctant to accept the historical and geopolitical fact of Iran's importance in its region, and hence the underlying legitimacy of Iran's long-term aspirations to play a regional role, including in Afghanistan and Iraq. Of course, the United States and the rest of the international community have a clear interest in ensuring Iran plays a constructive role in those countries, rather than its current highly destructive and de-stabilizing role. Still, it seems clear that distinguishing Iran, as a country, from the clericist regime in Tehran and from the Iranian people it opposes, is fundamental to developing an effective Iran policy. The youthfulness of Iran's population, and Iranians' widespread dissatisfaction with the only regime many of them have ever known, are key advantages for the United States. But lack of diplomatic representation in Tehran, along with limited willingness to engage in discussion with Iran's leadership group - backed by force and international consensus, and addressing the broadest possible range of issues in partnership with other Muslim allies - severely limits U.S. options and restricts situational awareness. This makes it hard to clearly discern the Iranian role in an Islamic civil war, or to formulate viable policy responses to it (pp. 20-21).

Clearly, the US has understood as little of Iran's real and legitimate concerns as it did those of the Soviet Union during the Cold War. We always tend to think in terms of Good vs. Evil and those are not useful demarcations. The real world is more complex than that. We're not always innocent of blame; the other side is not always guilty of the blame.

The Brookings Institute has released a paper studying the issues, Europe, the United States, and Middle Eastern Democracy: Repairing the Breach. They suggest the following steps:

• Avoid concretizing divergent rhetoric in disparate European and American mechanisms or institutions. Brussels and Washington should consider setting up a higher-level transatlantic forum for coordinating policies in the Middle East, along the lines of the U.S.-E.U. strategic dialogue on Asia established in 2005.


• Continue issuing joint diplomatic statements on the need for and desired shape of Middle Eastern reform. The Atlantic community should leave Arab leaders in no doubt of the West’s continued interest in and attention to democratic growth and human rights improvements in the Middle East.


• Coordinate rewards on offer for democratic reform. The Atlantic allies should seek common criteria for determining such rewards and coordinate on the use of positive conditionality to induce greater reform and ease the costs of change.


• Uphold the principle that local civil society can seek and accept foreign assistance. The European Union and the United States should articulate clearly and forcefully that their links to and support of Arab civil society are non-negotiable.


• Coordinate positions on engagement with Islamists. Western defense of peaceful political activism should not be selective, and transatlantic pressure should be wielded when regimes crack down on nonviolent Islamist organizations or prevent them from meeting with Western donors.


• Improve coordination in the provision of non-governmental aid. American and European government funders should engage in more sustained and regular dialogue on funding strategies for democratic development in specific states, and how to use their funds most efficiently to achieve common goals.


• Stress jointly that democratic development in the Middle East is a common interest of Europe, the United States, and the peoples of the region, not a means to other ends. Democracy should be supported as a system that meets the aspirations of Middle Eastern citizens for greater say in their government, and not simply because it is judged as instrumental for Western interests.

The paper points out the Europe and the US approach the problem from different angles and conclude that "If European and American policymakers wish to move beyond the ructions of recent years, they can and should focus on their points of relative similarity as a foundation from which transatlantic cooperation in the Middle East can, cautiously, be rebuilt."

On the economic recovery front, the full text of the bill to be introduced is now available from the US House of Representatives Committee on Rules here.

The New York Times reports that
"The Obama administration plans to move quickly to tighten the nation’s financial regulatory system":

Officials say they will make wide-ranging changes, including stricter federal rules for hedge funds, credit rating agencies and mortgage brokers, and greater oversight of the complex financial instruments that contributed to the economic crisis.

The Times observes that "Some of these actions will require legislation, while others should be achievable through regulations adopted by several federal agencies."

The best news of all is perhaps this: "Administration officials have begun to study ways to control executive compensation."

“Excessive executive compensation that provides inappropriate incentives,” Mr. Geithner said, “has played a role in exacerbating the financial crisis.”

Hail to the chief!

President Obama's first internet address, Saturday, January 24th, 2009 at 5:55 am:



Download the Recovery Plan Metrics Report

This is a new era. We've gone from radio addresses by FDR to television addresses and now internet addresses. And you can download them for posterity, to share, or listen to later, when you have some quiet time away from kids and other distractions. Technology is amazing. And I love how this new president embraces it. This is a forward thinking man, not a neobarb like the last bunch to infest our nation's capital.

This is obviously a very contentious issue. It has been and it will remain so, whatever is finally decided about the stimulus package.

Republican opposition is almost laughable. They say "You can't do this! It doesn't have any trickle-down economics in it!"

Of course, we've tried trickle-down economics before. It doesn't work. No matter how often they try it, it doesn't work. The wealthy just pocket the money. They don't create new jobs with it.

They have had their chance. It's time for a change. It's their failed economic policies that got us here in the first place.

AssociatedContent.com put Obama's response this way:

After listening to a critique of the nearly nine hundred billion dollars stimulus package from Republican Congressional leaders, along with some helpful suggestions on how to fix it, President Barack Obama had a two word answer.

"I won," President Obama said, indicating why the Republicans were not going to have any significant input into the bill.

Some of Obama's supporters are upset with him regarding the Palestine issue. There are some real opponents of Israel in this country and they see this whole situation in terms of Israel=evil, Palestinians=good. There is talk of holocaust - by the Jews this time and not against them. To be sure, the news out of Palestine is grim. To be sure, atrocities have been committed. And to be honest, I do not see any drastic changes in the future. I warned of this on Digg over the past few days. The cost to Obama in political capital would be too great. The Israel lobby is very strong. The US has had a special relationship with Israel since 1948. The US has invested a great deal in the State of Israel. It's not likely we'll abandon them now.

That said, I think it's too early to condemn Obama. He has been president for less than a week. Isreal is holding new elections and it's not like he can go there and talk to...who? He has no idea who will be elected. He has appointed Mitchell as his special envoy but Mitchell has not had a chance to go over there yet either (according to Reuters, he's expected to go next week).

The truth is, people are impatient. They want change now. They're used to living in a world that offers immediate gratification. This sounds trite, but change doesn't happen overnight. We need to be patient. We need to give diplomacy a chance. We need to give Obama a chance.

I'm a little disappointed in people who are willing to condemn him so quickly, or who think the Gaza situation is the most important situation facing either Obama or our country.

Finally, Pakistan is still in the news. So far, the US has made no official announcement about the rocket attacks. It's been suggested that CIA-controlled drones made the strikes. We won't know for sure what's going on until somebody accepts responsibility.

All this goes to show that the problems facing Obama are many and varied. I would not want to be that man right now.

It is the fourth day of the new Era. I can easily understand ancient dating systems that were reckoned according to the reign of a king. That is how clear the demarcation between January 19th and January 20th seems. Where nothing was possible before, everything seems possible now, and no critics have so far managed to rain on my parade. People are too quick to judge. No matter what Obama does, some will say he acted rashly, and others will say he acted too slowly. But it's the nature of people to think they know better (including me) as well as to be impatient. And can you blame them after the eight years we have endured?

There are concerns among some that Obama's executive orders of yesterday left too much wiggle room - too many things on the table that should not be on the table. For example, the army manual will be examined to see if anything needs to be changed. The ACLU fears methods might be added to the 19 methods of approved interrogation that could lead to further abuses and violation of international law. Apparently even the "isolation" of a prisoner is against international law and that is one of the 19 methods approved of by the army manual. An army general stated that it's much ado about nothing, that the military is constantly re-assessing its tactics and methods to improve them. I suppose this is one of those times we will have to wait and see what happens. Like the ACLU, I'm hopeful. We've been a rogue nation long enough and I do not believe Obama intends to further the alienation begun under Bush.

The big news today is the signing by Obama of another executive order, this one revoking the so-called "Mexico City policy" - a rule which prohibits U.S. money from going to international family planning groups that promote abortion or provide information, counseling or referrals about abortion services - first put in place by President Reagan in 1984, then canceled by President Clinton in January of '93 as one of his first acts in office, only to be reinstated by President George W. Bush in 2001 as one of his first acts. Obviously, the conservatives are unhappy over this but CNN tells us that "The group Population Action International praised Obama's move, saying in a statement that it will "save women's lives around the world."

Something is being made of the fact that Obama chose today - one day after the anniversary of Roe vs. Wade - to sign this order. Other presidents have chosen that day to act, and it has been suggested that Obama deliberately held off one day to show so-called "pro-life" groups that he is not looking for a fight. I doubt Obama is that naive. He will get a fight either way. The abortion opponents (I simply can't grant them their self-styled title of "pro-life") offer no quarter and no compromise. It seems to have been the only real platform of the Republican base in this past election, and it is certain to resurface in 2012.

Also arguing against this interpretation are Obama's own words yesterday. According to CNN Obama said that Roe v. Wade

"not only protects women's health and reproductive freedom, but stands for a broader principle: that government should not intrude on our most private family matters."

On the international front, there are complaints that Obama is continuing the policies of his predecessor with reports Friday (unconfirmed by US officials) of U.S. drones striking militant targets in Pakistan and killing 17 people. Here is the interview former Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf gave to CNN's Wolf Blitzer:

Perhaps there will be more news by tomorrow that will affirm or reject these claims.

All in all, though less newsworthy, this fourth day of Obama's presidency has been quite satisfying.

It is Day 3 of the presidency of Barack Obama. I get an almost giddy feeling even typing that, as though it's a dream I never quite thought would come true. But it has, and it is difficult not to bask in the reality of it.

The New York Times provides a nice analysis this morning of Obama's first day as President, On Day One, Obama Sets a New Tone discussing and analyzing the president's initial moves and their importance in setting the tone of his administration. Another offering from the New York Times that is worth a read is Nicholas D. Kristof's The Remaking of America. Kristof makes the following memorable remark:

A BBC poll in 17 nations found that on average 67 percent believed that President Obama would improve America’s relations with the rest of the world; just 5 percent thought the opposite (or maybe feared that if they seemed critical of George W. Bush, they would be waterboarded).

Perhaps the biggest news of the day is the signing by Obama of an executive order to close Gitmo - Guantanamo Bay, Cuba - within a year. CNN reports that

During a signing ceremony at the White House, Obama reaffirmed his inaugural pledge that the United States does not have "to continue with a false choice between our safety and our ideals."

Two other executive orders followed the first:

A second executive order formally bans torture by requiring that the Army field manual be used as the guide for terror interrogations. That essentially ends the Bush administration's CIA program of enhanced interrogation methods.

This is a positive step, and one that I cannot praise too highly. And finally,

A third executive order establishes an interagency task force to lead a systematic review of detention policies and procedures and a review of all individual cases.

Obama says this task force will "provide me with information in terms of how we are able to deal (with) the disposition of some of the detainees that may be currently in Guantanamo that we cannot transfer to other countries, who could pose a serious danger to the United States."

Clearly, it will take more to close Gitmo than simply assertion a will to do so. The illegalities of the Bush administration has made the fate of some of the prisoners there highly problematic. They have already been denied due process. They may be guilty, but how can we try them now? I saw it suggested yesterday on MSNBC that some of them may end up being sent home to be tried by their own governments. It may well be that there are two choices, neither of them being "good" and "better."

Two additional executive orders followed:

A second executive order formally bans torture by requiring that the Army field manual be used as the guide for terror interrogations. That essentially ends the Bush administration's CIA program of enhanced interrogation methods.

This is another positive step. And finally,

A third executive order establishes an interagency task force to lead a systematic review of detention policies and procedures and a review of all individual cases.

Obama says that this task force will "provide me with information in terms of how we are able to deal (with) the disposition of some of the detainees that may be currently in Guantanamo that we cannot transfer to other countries, who could pose a serious danger to the United States."

Of course, the crazies are still out there. A sampling of today's rants:

* Obama will impose socialism on the United States
* Obama plans to kill millions of babies
* Obama plans to destroy "traditional" marriage

There is more, but those are the "high" points. The Right Wingnuts are doing everything they can to get themselves worked up and if it means inventing "facts" out of whole cloth, they've got the experience and lack of standards to do just that.

Finally, it has been reported in the New York Times that George J. Mitchell, a former Senate majority leader and the chairman of a Middle East peace commission in 2001, has been selected as special envoy to the MidEast. The paper has this to say:

The appointment of Mr. Mitchell, a seasoned and well-regarded negotiator, would signal that President-elect Barack Obama was attaching a high priority to the Middle East and the current Gaza crisis from his first days in office. Obama transition officials declined to comment on Mr. Mitchell, but David Axelrod, Mr. Obama’s senior adviser, told CNN on Sunday that Mr. Obama would move quickly to address the instability in the Middle East and hoped that the new cease-fires in Gaza would last.

Obviously, this is good news. Now that Hilary has been made officially part of the team, the gears of diplomacy can begin to grind. I'm looking for change, but I'm uncertain how much change we'll get given the strength of the Israel lobby in this country. I'd like to see them judged as every other nation is judged but we've held to a special relationship with them since 1948 and there is a lot of inertia behind our existing policies.

Anything Obama does to re-examine that relationship will cost him political capital. Given the news coming out of Washington, both from Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, you can be sure Obama will be carefully weighing where to spend that capital. Critical as the situation in the MidEast is, my own hope is that he will look at our domestic problems first.

The news services are abuzz this morning with speculation about what the first steps of the Obama administration will reveal. He began his first full day in office with a moment of solitude in the Oval Office, reading a note left for him by Bush, before making phone calls to Middle East leaders, including King Abdullah of Jordan, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.

But as of last night, Obama had already acted in two ways: he ordered a halt to Gitmo cases for 21 days, allowing time for a review, and, in the words of CNN, "Chief Staff of Staff Rahm Emanuel sent a memo Tuesday to all agencies and departments of the federal government. The memo halts further consideration of pending regulations throughout the government until a legal and policy review can be conducted by the Obama administration."

These are two critically important steps. Clearly, the Obama transition team, as it has done all along, did its homework and has a playbook in place. They know exactly what must be done going forward and I suspect many of Obama's first steps are at this point pre-programmed, designed to halt a further deterioration of the problems confronting us and minimizing the sabotage inflicted on his administration by last minute regulations enacted by President Bush.

And this today from Glenn Greenwald at Salon.com:

There is some genuinely good news today from the Obama camp: following up on the appointment of the excellent Dawn Johnsen to be OLC Chief, it was announced yesterday that Johnsen's second-in-command at OLC will be Harvard Law Professor and vehement Bush critic David Barron, who, among other things, co-wrote this superb Law Review article arguing that the President's "war powers" have been wildly overstated over the last many decades while Congressional power in this area has been vastly understated. Also joining the Justice Department in a still-unknown capacity is one of the smartest, most principled, and most unyielding opponents of the legal radicalism that prevailed over the last eight years: blogger and Georgetown Law Professor Marty Lederman (who co-wrote that law review article with Barron on the Constitutional limits on the "commander-in-chief" powers). It is virtually impossible to imagine that particular group of individuals placing political allegiance to Barack Obama over the principles they have so forcefully advocated over the last several years.

As Greenwald says, "The importance of these appointments shouldn't be understated." This news alone is enough to make me want to dance in the streets, and anyone who knows me knows I'm not much of one for dancing.


It is a new day. The first morning. And if last night was a symbolic wedding, then the 100 days are the honeymoon, the best chance President Obama has of pushing his agenda forward and seeing his legislation enacted.

I feel better, physically. Stress, as everyone knows, is unhealthy. Since election night, I have been stressed by thoughts of all the awful things Bush was doing (to the environment, to our rights) and would do to inflict maximum harm on our nation and by extension, the world.

As of noon yesterday, the hostile acts of an embittered and mean-spirited administration ceased. And last night, for the first time in eight years, I could go to bed almost free of worry. I suspect many people will feel an improvement in their lives as a result. Not only scientists and economists but average Americans like me.

The skeptics and doubters, as well as conservative opponents and critics, are at work already as well. WND published an article called "Change We Cannot Believe In" making its usual list of false assertions, misstating the facts etc - basically being as propagandistic and divisive as Joseph Göbbels' Der Angriff. Rush Limbaugh has already said he will pray for Obama to fail. I haven't seen such levels of hatred since the 60s and early 70s, when I was a child.

Even so, the good news continues to pour out of Washington. Most recently, from CNN:

Promising "a new era of openness in our country," President Barack Obama signed executive orders Wednesday relating to ethics guidelines for staff members of his administration. "Transparency and the rule of law will be the touchstones of this presidency," Obama said.

This Administration even at a very early stage seems to be making every attempt to set itself apart from the previous administration. Where Bush was secretive, Obama is open. "This is going to be a general principle of governing," he told CNN's John King. "No spin, play it straight, describe to the American people the state that we're in." Where corruption was the name of the game for the past eight years, Obama swears above-board behavior. Where Bush embraced torture, Obama has abjured such methods of interrogation. Where Bush made war and looked for more, Obama has extended an open hand of friendship to those, in his words, who will unclench their fists.

A final piece of news today, from CNN:

The Senate today approved the nomination of Hillary Clinton as secretary of state by a vote of 94-2. Speaking from the floor, Sen. John McCain urged a quick confirmation. About an hour after the vote, Clinton was sworn in during a private ceremony attended by her husband, former President Clinton. She also formally resigned from the Senate.

I heartily approve of her selection. I think she will make a strong secretary of state, and I'm happy to see McCain did the right thing. I hope he will prove to be a voice of reason on the Republican side.

At noon today, eight years of failed domestic and foreign policy decisions, fueled by a divisive and corrosive ideology, stepped into the pages of history.

At noon today, a new era began. The Obama Era.



I call this blog Restitutor Orbis.

RESTITUTOR ORBIS - "Restorer of the World"

The title granted to Roman emperors who had stepped into a crisis that threatened the very survival of the empire and by their actions, saved it.

Our own crisis is no less dire than that faced by Rome in the third century of the Common Era. Our nation, like Rome, is faced with a financial crisis and with multiple wars.

In this blog I will chronicle the presidency of Barack Obama on a daily basis, reflecting not only on the state of America but of the world, and Obama's influence upon both.

This journal is dedicated to a little boy, my four-year-old son, who is too young to understand the momentous changes occurring in our country, changes that will impact his life from this day forward.

I hope that someday, he can look back, and in reading these posts, gain a better understanding of the world he is stepping into.

And I hope that by putting my thoughts down on these virtual pages that I will myself gain a better understanding of the world, and of what may well be our last best chance to save America, before our nation too becomes the stuff of history books.

Is my view of Obama biased? Most certainly. Is my acclamation of Obama as a restorer premature? I do not think so. He has already restored the most precious commodity of all, and not only to the citizens of the US, but to citizens of the world: HOPE.