Restitutor Orbis

Reuters reports that the stimulus bill has narrowly cleared the Senate:

The U.S. Senate on Monday moved a step closer toward approving President Barack Obama's plan to jolt the U.S. economy out of recession with government spending and tax breaks, setting up a vote to pass the $838 billion emergency package on Tuesday.

After a week of contentious debate, senators reached a deal to pare down the stimulus bill by about $100 billion and voted 61-36, with minimal Republican support, that it was time to hold a final ballot at 12:00 p.m. EST Tuesday.

What happens next, if the bill passes the final vote tomorrow, is that "the Senate and House of Representatives will enter final negotiations on a compromise bill, with Obama arbitrating disputes." There is some slight hope that some of the impact of the bill can be restored before it's signed into law, but the chances do not appear promising given Republican opposition. Even after all the negotiations that have taken place, only three Republicans voted for passage today - Sens. Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe and Arlen Specter.

According to Reuters, "Obama wants the stimulus legislation on his desk for signing into law by this weekend in the hope that it will begin to create and save up to 4 million jobs."

Obama's approval rating, according to a new Gallup Poll, is at 67%, quite a bit higher than Republicans would like to admit (in fact, most of those I've run into on Digg refuse to accept so high a figure - they insist Obama's popularity is slipping). According to Gallup:

President Obama receives a 67% approval rating for his handling of the government’s efforts to pass an economic stimulus bill, compared to 31% for the Republicans in Congress. A majority of Americans (51%) agree that passing such a bill is critically important to improving the nation’s economy.

Another bit of good news on the horizon that deserves mention is the possibility of an investigation into what went on during the Bush administration. According to Reuters,

A U.S. "truth commission" should investigate Bush administration policies including the promotion of war in Iraq, detainee treatment and wiretapping without a warrant, an influential senator proposed on Monday.

Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, urged a commission as a way to heal what he called sharp political divides under former President George W. Bush and to prevent future abuses.

He compared it to other truth commissions, such as one in South Africa that investigated the apartheid era.

Though, of course, Republicans are against the possibility, Leahy is correct in saying an investigation must be made:

"We need to come to a shared understanding of the failures of the recent past," Leahy said in a speech at Georgetown University.

"Rather than vengeance, we need a fair-minded pursuit of what actually happened," the Vermont senator said. "And we do that to make sure it never happens again."

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."