Obama Presidency

[Glockinette]

C'est un libéral ?

Oui, c'est un libéral. Enfin bon, selon moi, après, chacun a sa propre conception du libéralisme. En tout cas, il est ouvertement et profondément anti-socialiste; rien que ça, c'est un point très positif! Surtout vu le contexte actuel aux US… Il représente la droite américaine, le capitalisme, et il le fait sans complexe. Du coup, ça a le don d'énerver les bonnes âmes Démocrates, qui n'hésitent pas à oublier leur beaux principes de tolérance et d'ouverture d'esprit pour s'acharner sur lui. Sans succès. Plus ils veulent l'enfoncer, plus il l'ouvre!

[Randian shithead]

Il définit les conservateurs (au sens américain de ce mot) comme suit : "We believe in individual liberty, limited government, capitalism, the rule of law, faith, a color-blind society and national security.". A toi de juger.

Comme l'avait dit Ash (je crois) il y a quelques temps, les conservateurs américains ont toujours eu ce discours, mais ne suivent pas vraiment dans les faits.

[Nick de Cusa]

Même pas cap'.

Moi je dis : pe tit ki ki.

Les USA "n'ont pas besoin d'un nouveau plan de relance"

Les Etats-Unis n'ont pas besoin pour le moment d'un nouveau plan de relance de l'économie, a déclaré mardi le président américain Barack Obama lors d'une conférence de presse, en estimant que les résultats du premier plan de relance n'étaient pas encore palpables.

Interrogé sur l'éventualité de la mise en place d'un deuxième plan de relance économique après celui de 787 milliards de dollars adopté en février par le Congrès, M. Obama a répondu: "pas maintenant".

"Je pense qu'il est important de voir comment l'économie évolue et quelle efficacité a le premier plan de relance", a dit M. Obama.

"Je pense qu'il est clair maintenant que le chômage va monter au dessus de 10% (…) en raison du fait que même après que les employeurs et les entreprises ont commencé à investir à nouveau, cela prend du temps en principe pour que les chiffres du chômage commencent à remonter", a-t-il dit.

M. Obama a prévenu que "cela va être une année difficile, une période difficile".

Il a rappelé que le plan de relance économique avait été l'une des premières actions entreprises après son arrivée à la Maison Blanche en janvier.

"A ce moment-là personne ne comprenait quelle allait être la gravité de cette récession", a estimé M. Obama, qui avait salué fin mai les premiers résultats du plan de relance, cent jours après sa promulgation.

Largement soutenu par les Américains quand M. Obama l'a promulgué le 17 février, le plan, fait d'investissements dans les grands chantiers publics pour créer des emplois et d'abattements fiscaux pour stimuler la consommation, a été accueilli avec scepticisme par les adversaires républicains de M. Obama et par une partie des économistes.

Les premiers ont accusé M. Obama d'alourdir les déficits publics et de laisser une dette intolérable aux futures générations. Les seconds se sont interrogés sur l'efficacité des mesures pour atteindre l'objectif énoncé de créer ou de sauver plus de trois millions d'emplois en deux ans.

Mais la plus grande partie de ces dépenses n'a en fait pas encore été engagée, étant donné les délais nécessaires en particulier pour lancer de grands travaux. La Maison Blanche attend ainsi que le plan de relance produise surtout ses effets à partir de 2010.

De son côté, le secrétaire au Trésor, Timothy Geithner, avait déclaré le 13 juin lors d'une conférence de presse: "Je ne pense pas que nous en soyons encore au point où nous pouvons dire que nous avons une reprise".

La plupart des économistes anticipent un retour des Etats-Unis à la croissance lors du troisième trimestre, à un rythme d'abord très lent. (belga)

http://www.7sur7.be/7s7/fr/1536/Economie/a…e-relance.dhtml

[Jefferson]

cette phrase, de Rush limbaugh, est magnifique:

I love being a conservative. We conservatives are proud of our philosophy. Unlike our liberal friends, who are constantly looking for new words to conceal their true beliefs and are in a perpetual state of reinvention, we conservatives are unapologetic about our ideals.

[Glockinette]

Pitié pas elle, elle va nous cramer 2012

Oui, c'est vrai que c'est risqué… En 2008, les gens n'étaient pas prêts, après 8 ans de Bush. Surtout que les neo-conservateurs ont bien façonné Sarah pour les questions de politique étrangére, la faisant passer pour une belliciste écervelée. Mais après quelques années d'Obama, qui sait?

Sarah Palin, on l'aime ou on l'aime pas, mais on ne peut que reconnaitre que la gauche US s'est acharnée sur elle avec une férocité rare, et qu'elle a tenu bon. Elle a su galvaniser les foules, motiver les troupes Républicaines, ce que McCain avait bien du mal à faire. Elle a des lacunes oui, mais elle est jeune et a le temps nécessaire pour les combler. Alors, Palin 2012, peut-être pas. Mais Palin 2016 ou 2020, you betcha!

[Glockinette]

cette phrase, de Rush limbaugh, est magnifique:

I love being a conservative. We conservatives are proud of our philosophy. Unlike our liberal friends, who are constantly looking for new words to conceal their true beliefs and are in a perpetual state of reinvention, we conservatives are unapologetic about our ideals.

+1

Il est génial, Rush! D'ailleurs, ça serait bien d'en avoir un, version française. Y a t-il des volontaires parmi les hommes de ce forum pour être le Limbaugh du pays des droits de l'homme?

[h16]

[Ash]

Excellent !

[Brock]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte…2403676_pf.html

A First Lady Who Demands Substance

Michelle Obama Wants to Be Part of Events That Have Purpose And a Message -- and That Parallel the President's Agenda.

By Lois Romano

Washington Post Staff Writer

Thursday, June 25, 2009

For weeks, Michelle Obama had been telling her staff and closest confidantes that she wasn't having the impact she wanted. She is a woman of substance, with a background in law, public policy and management, who found herself relegated to role model in chief. The West Wing of the White House -- the fulcrum of power and policy -- had not fully integrated her into its agenda. She wanted more.

So, earlier this month, she changed her chief of staff, and now she's changing her role.

Her new chief of staff, Susan Sher, 61, is a close friend and former boss who the first lady thinks will be more forceful about getting her and her team on the West Wing's radar screen. The first thing Sher said she told senior adviser David Axelrod, whom she has known for years: When I call, "you need to get back to me right away."

The former chief of staff, Jackie Norris, 37, was "not on the first lady's wavelength," said one source, echoing others, all of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal matters. "Susan is more of a peer," a senior White House official said. "I think that's probably a better model."

Although Obama's job-approval ratings have soared, the first lady -- a Harvard-educated lawyer -- wasn't satisfied with coasting. She is hiring a full-time speechwriter and has instructed her staff to think "strategically" so that every event has a purpose and a message. She doesn't want to simply go to events and hug struggling military families, she said; she wants to show progress. "Her desire is to step out more and have deliverables," said communications chief Camille Johnston. "It's about things that are coming up that we want to be a part of: child nutrition reauthorization act, prevention and wellness for health-care reform."

In the past couple of weeks, Obama has been more vocal about the specifics of the president's health plan, and she will play a substantive role in promoting it. She will soon announce the creation of an advisory board to help military families. And she will be the face of the administration's United We Serve, a summer-long national service program, which she launched on Monday. Even her social events have a message: She let congressional families know that before the annual White House barbecue today, the 500 guests are expected to show up at Fort McNair to stuff camp backpacks with goodies for the children of military personnel.

Obama has also taken stock of her family life, which she has found to be more constrained than she expected. She has concluded that there's really only one road toward some semblance of a private life for them -- and it leads away from the White House.

Laying Out Her Strategy

On Jan. 14, days before the inauguration, Obama assembled her new staff in a conference room at transition headquarters for a two-hour lunch meeting. In the room was a mix of loyal campaign aides, good friends she had persuaded to leave high-paying corporate jobs, and political professionals who were virtual strangers to her. It was the first time many of the 20 or so aides had met, and the incoming first lady said she expected them to operate "at 120 percent." All eyes were on them, she cautioned, and there was little room for error.

She emphasized that they must work on a parallel track with the president's office to avoid the historical East Wing-West Wing tensions that have plagued most administrations. "Seamless" was the word she used to describe the partnership she expected with her husband's staff.

Last, she exhorted her staff to find a personal balance. For her part, Obama informed them that she would practice what she preached: She did not intend to work more than 2 1/2 days a week. She was also planning to take off the month of August.

Unspoken but well known to some in the room was how unhappy Obama had been with the lack of campaign support she received during the presidential primaries. The president's advisers acknowledge that Michelle Obama was ill-served in the early days of the 2008 campaign, when opponents were able to portray her as unpatriotic, haughty and a caricature of an angry black woman. She was horrified to learn that she had become a liability to the candidate for saying that for the first time in her life, she was proud of her country.

"Obviously, given how fundamentally distorted the public lens was on her, I think we could have done a much better job for her. . . . I don't think there's any question about that," Axelrod concedes. "It took her a while to dig out of that."

It was against this background that the first lady and her staff were determined to create in the White House a culture that was, as Norris put it, "authentic" to the first lady. Since the election, her disciplined (journalists might say controlling) staff has carefully managed her media exposure and methodically laid the groundwork for her issues, a "soft launch," as one aide said. And the first lady's approval ratings flew into the 80s, exceeding her husband's, and higher than any other first lady's at a comparable time.

Norris had been Obama's Iowa state coordinator and had become close to Michelle Obama during the campaign. But Norris said in an interview that she came to agree that she wasn't a good fit for this job -- which requires not only management and policy skills but also inevitably touches on the first lady's personal and family life.

One early miscalculation on Norris's part was that she tried to take on Desiree Rogers, a close friend of the first lady, insisting that the social secretary report to her. The disagreement culminated in what one White House aide described as a "blowup." Valerie Jarrett, aide to the president and a friend of both women, had to step in and smooth over a conflict that many thought should never have been engaged. "We brought in people with strong personalities and passions," Norris said. "Disagreements are inevitable."

Jarrett -- a Chicago friend who is helping develop the first lady's official role -- said Michelle Obama's immense popularity has forced a rethinking of how she fits into the policy calculus. "We spend time thinking that through and where is she going to have the biggest impact," Jarrett said.

Axelrod said that initially "we were throwing her out there in the kinds of events that were probably not press-worthy. . . . There was a push for quantity and not quality."

But he added that the plan had always been to enhance her role around this time, after she had a chance to settle her family. "We are focused now on quality events that are related to her passions," he said. "We don't want to use her as a utility player for political chores."

Sher noted: "The key is you can get schedule-driven as opposed to being strategy-driven. You could spend all your time yes-no, yes-no as opposed to [deciding] what are the things that we really should be working on."

Sher, a lawyer and manager, has already begun stepping up interaction with the West Wing -- particularly with Anita Dunn, the communications director, who had advised Michelle Obama during the campaign. "Anita is paying attention to us over here," Sher said.

Elements of Chicago

In naming Sher, Obama took another step toward re-creating her Chicago life on a world stage. She has surrounded herself with familiar faces, starting with her mother, who lives in the White House and takes Malia and Sasha to school every day in an unmarked SUV. Obama begins her day at 5:30 a.m. with another Chicago transplant, Cornell McClellan, who has been her and her husband's personal trainer for 12 years. The family's meals are largely prepared by Chicagoan Sam Kass, a White House assistant chef, who also oversees the organic garden.

After the move to Washington, Obama sat down with her staff and two calendars: one from the office, one from Sidwell Friends, her daughters' new school. No events would be scheduled that presented a potential conflict with the girls. But she quickly discovered that her days off don't allow her any real freedom. When she wore shorts to walk the dog last week in a sheltered spot on the White House lawn, photos showed up on the Internet within hours.

So now, with school over for the year, Obama has developed a plan that takes her and the girls out of Washington, where she thinks they can have more fun and independence. Sasha and Malia accompanied the first lady to San Francisco on Monday, and next month, they will join their parents on an official presidential trip to Russia, Italy and Ghana. The family is expected to spend more time at Camp David, where they can entertain close friends in privacy.

At work, Obama runs her office like a business in which she is chief executive. She doesn't want to micromanage, she has made clear; she wants to delegate. Up and down the hall are professional women with whom she has a longtime connection and whom she trusts to execute her vision. Rogers, another friend from Chicago, has an office just a few feet away. Also nearby is Jocelyn Frye, whom Obama met at Harvard Law School and who is the first lady's policy director. A family law advocate and expert on equal opportunity employment law, Frye is also a link to the D.C. community. She grew up in Washington and still lives a few blocks from her parents' house in the Michigan Park area of Northeast. She has pointed the first lady to homeless shelters, soup kitchens and schools.

Sher, who worked with Michelle Obama in the Chicago mayor's office and later hired her at the University of Chicago Medical Center, was a reluctant recruit, leaving her husband behind in Chicago.

Sher, Rogers and Jarrett are so close that they have rented apartments in the same Georgetown building, near the waterfront, with Jarrett and Sher directly across the hall from each other. "We'll even do errands together on the weekend," Sher said. The first lady attended a small birthday celebration for Rogers last week and has had "girls' nights" with the women.

They all know that Obama wants to continue to offer opportunities to people like herself. She grew up in working-class South Chicago, in the shadow of one of the most elite private colleges in the country, the University of Chicago. Yet Obama recalls vividly that when she was a high school student hoping to rise above her circumstances, the university seemed far beyond her reach. She was determined this would not happen at the White House on her watch.

"No one there had ever reached out to say, 'Hey, maybe there's a place for you here,' " Johnston said. Obama has either visited or invited to the White House students from 30 Washington schools, and she was instrumental in developing the first White House summer internship program specifically for D.C. high school students. She brought high school girls to the White House to rub elbows with such female icons as singer Alicia Keys and astronaut Mae Jemison. Some of the girls were so nervous, they were sobbing before they went inside. "Michelle hugged each and every girl before they left," Jarrett said. "We talked about that night a lot, and she was really quite struck by her ability to really leave a lasting, positive impression as a role model."

Social as Political

Though Obama doesn't have much freedom outside the White House, she has already shaken up the status quo in her new home, including turning the White House fountains green on St. Patrick's Day and holding the first Seder hosted by a president. She also intentionally served a formal dinner to the nation's governors on mismatched china -- 28 years after Nancy Reagan famously complained because nothing matched and proceeded to spend $200,000 on a new set of Lenox.

One of the first people let in on Obama's vision was the woman charged with executing the cultural and social message for the White House: Rogers, 50, the first African American social secretary. The stuffy world of protocol has never seen the likes of Rogers, a glamorous Harvard MBA and former corporate executive, who unabashedly posed in $100,000 earrings for a magazine photo shoot -- much to the amusement of her boosters in the East Wing, and the anxiety of the president's advisers. Axelrod, a longtime friend, let it be known that he was agitated by the WSJ magazine profile in which she wore the earrings and talked about the "Obama brand."

Obama tasked Rogers with ensuring that every social event has a populist component, as she did last week when Duke Ellington High School students attended workshops with jazz greats. Rogers said that the Obamas want to convey that coming to the White House is "just a home visit." That's why, she said, the first lady hugs so many people who walk through the doors. "You try to take the fear out of just the mere awe of walking through the gates."

The Obamas are in no rush to schedule a state dinner for a foreign head of state, Rogers said. At the president's request, the first lady is planning a series of intimate "salon dinners." Rogers said she had provided the Obamas with a list of about 1,000 arts, business and science names and several suggested guest lists. "The opportunity to have 10 people that you're interested in and hear what they have to say about something," she said. "How fabulous!"

Every morning, Rogers and Sher attend White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel's 8:15 staff meeting. Johnston, a newcomer to Obama's circle but a White House veteran, and Katie McCormick Lelyveld, the first lady's press secretary, sit in on White House press secretary Robert Gibbs's daily message meeting. As part of the president's domestic policy team, Frye meets with its staff weekly. Senior aides David Medina and Trooper Sanders work on national service and international issues, and Norris remains close to the office in her new job at the Corporation for National and Community Service.

They're all focused on raising the stakes. "It isn't just about hugging," Sher said. "Whatever she talks about will bring press and interest, but it's important that she's not just talking [but] actually moving forward on those issues."

[José]

Or donc le Messie a monté un programme spécial de téloche, avec l'aide de ses attachés de presse, pour expliquer au bon peuple son merveilleux plan de santé publique.

En plus du fait que l'audience fut plutôt minable, les Américains ont eu droit à ce magnifique exemple de l'hypocrisie du gauchiste au pouvoir :

President Obama struggled to explain today whether his health care reform proposals would force normal Americans to make sacrifices that wealthier, more powerful people — like the president himself — wouldn’t face.

The probing questions came from two skeptical neurologists during ABC News’ special on health care reform, “Questions for the President: Prescription for America,” anchored from the White House by Diane Sawyer and Charles Gibson.

Dr. Orrin Devinsky, a neurologist and researcher at the New York University Langone Medical Center, said that elites often propose health care solutions that limit options for the general public, secure in the knowledge that if they or their loves ones get sick, they will be able to afford the best care available, even if it’s not provided by insurance.

Devinsky asked the president pointedly if he would be willing to promise that he wouldn’t seek such extraordinary help for his wife or daughters if they became sick and the public plan he’s proposing limited the tests or treatment they can get.

The president refused to make such a pledge, though he allowed that if “it’s my family member, if it’s my wife, if it’s my children, if it’s my grandmother, I always want them to get the very best care.["]

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/06/25/obam…dukakis-moment/

Pour ceux qui ne comprennent pas vite, Obama explique tranquilllement que les prolos auront juste droit à ObamaCare, mais que sa famille à lui aura toujours le meilleur que l'argent puisse payer. Hope and Change!

[Glockinette]

Hope and Change!

Ouais, hope and change! comme tu dis…

Obama-the-Messiah censé amener la paix dans le monde et "partager la richesse" aux US… Aie, aie, aie, c'est pas très réjouissant tout ça. Mais restons positifs: en 2012 ou 2016, les Républicains reprendront vraisemblablement le pouvoir et pourront commencer à réparer les erreurs commises par le Messie BHO. Il faut juste espérer que les néo-conservateurs ne parviennent pas à prendre complètement en otage le parti Républicain.

[José]

White House Weighs Order on Detention

Officials: Move Would Reassert Power To Hold Terror Suspects Indefinitely

Obama administration officials, fearing a battle with Congress that could stall plans to close the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, are crafting language for an executive order that would reassert presidential authority to incarcerate terrorism suspects indefinitely, according to three senior government officials with knowledge of White House deliberations.

Such an order would embrace claims by former president George W. Bush that certain people can be detained without trial for long periods under the laws of war. Obama advisers are concerned that an order, which would bypass Congress, could place the president on weaker footing before the courts and anger key supporters, the officials said.

After months of internal debate over how to close the military facility in Cuba, White House officials are increasingly worried that reaching quick agreement with Congress on a new detention system may be impossible. Several officials said there is concern in the White House that the administration may not be able to close the prison by the president's January deadline.

[…]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte…2603361_pf.html

[José]

The definitive, final, once and for all, Obama's-honeymoon-is-over story…

Mark it on your calendars. It was in June 2009 that Barack Obama's honeymoon officially ended. And to be more specific, it was this past week. Through some mysterious alchemy, this was the week that Bush's economy became Obama's, Bush's wars became Obama's, and the ups and downs of a real workaday relationship with the press also introduced Obama to a more accurate sense of what life was like for Bush and for all his other modern predecessors.

While the change is clear for the reasons I will note below, no one should lament the end of the honeymoon, even though it may be hard for Obama and his colleagues in the Administration not to. It must be nice looking out into the White House press room and seeing all those hardened reporters looking as dewy-eyed and adoring as a teen-aged girl who discovers that Robert Pattinson has appeared at her doorstep to take her to the prom. But five months is not bad for a honeymoon. I've had two and the best I could do was a little over a week. (During the first honeymoon, my new wife spent most of the few days we had throwing up…which should have been an early warning sign that another honeymoon would be in the cards.)

Of course, people have been writing about the end of Obama's honeymoon since the day he arrived in office. But let me offer 10 solid pieces of evidence that it was over by this week. And I say this despite the unnerving fact that the Daily Kos seems to agree with my assessment…and shored up by the fact that NBC's Chuck Todd, CNN's Jack Cafferty, CQ, the Huffington Post, the New York Daily News, and a host of other media outlets all seem to agree by having grappled with the issue…or, depending on how you look at it, succumbed to the conventional wisdom…in the past week or 10 days. Just goes to show: even the conventional wisdom is right every once in a while.

Media herd mentality aside, here are 10 reasons (in no particular order) why a reasonable person might conclude that we have entered a new chapter in the Obama presidency in the past few days:

1. Ask not for whom the poll tolls…

The most common reason cited by pundits for saying Obama's entered a new phase was polling data, like an NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll citing growing doubts about the administration's economic policies. He is seen as the author of budget deficit increases (even though he is responsible for only a tiny fraction of projected shortfalls), an expanded government role in the economy and moves in Detroit that have a majority of voters uneasy…which also suggests that we're on Obama Time now in the economy. It's his to fix or screw up further.

2. Can we be frank?

Sometimes a hot dog is just a hot dog. But sometimes visions of July 4th frankfurter diplomacy with representatives of the Iranian regime, among others, suggest real foreign policy short-sightedness. Hadn't anyone thought through what might happen in the elections? Of course, the cook-out kerfuffle was just pigs in a blanket compared to the administration's tentativeness in response to the unrest in Iran. It might have been the right call at first, but the Iranian crisis quickly revealed that even charming, smart presidents get hamstrung on issues where there are few good responses and none without some negative consequences.

3. No matter who is president, Kim Jong Il is still nuts…

Kim Jong Il has spent the past month reinforcing the preceding point. "You may be Mr. Charisma," he says via his missile tests and nuclear experiments, "by I am Mr. Certifiable Loon. Which in the rock-paper-scissors of international diplomacy means I win every time." All of a sudden, Obama finds when it comes to North Korea…and a host of other places…sitting in the Oval Office makes him look and act a lot like his predecessor no matter how much he wishes it weren't so.

4. Speaking of nuts, what about U.S. trade rhetoric?

One sign that the sweet glide is over is when after you mete out a policy here and a policy there, you look back and discover none of it makes any sense. In the past week USTR Ron Kirk has threatened to go after the EU if they offer more financial help to Airbus and a few days earlier the US was threatening to go after China for the Buy Chinese provisions in their stimulus package. But, um, aren't we subsidizing Detroit and don't we have Buy America provisions in our stimulus package? As my daughters would say, "awkward!"

5. Obama's doctor and his financial guru turn on him in one week…

At the height of the economic crisis, Warren Buffet was the sage that helped win the election for Obama. Then this week he demonstrates that troubling candor and independence that made him so widely respected by going starkly off message. He joked that despite recent eye surgery he doesn't see any "green shoots" in the economy. He also called it a shambles. Then Obama's own doctor went after the health care plan. Et tu, Bones? Keep your friends close, they say, and your enemies closer. But what happens when they start to sound alike?

6. Kissing up to a president who smokes is like kissing an ashtray…

The president insists he is only an occasional smoker. Doesn't matter. Smoking is gross, sets a bad example and is so 20th Century. It may have been cool in the parking lot at Punahou, Mr. President, but not in the Rose Garden. The nastiness over questions for the president on this subject also really captured the testy relationship emerging between the president and his former groupies in the press corp, best described in a New York Times account that made you feel "if this is how testy he gets this early in the game, what should we expect when he's been stewing in office for a few years?"

7. Fixing health care can be dangerous to your political health…

Health care is the one area of the U.S. economy most urgently in need of a major structural fix… and that's saying something. But, according to one senator with whom I spoke, "the health care battle is certain to leave blood on the walls…and that's just among us Democrats." It has shredded formidable pols in the past (place a call to Foggy Bottom if you don't recall) and while an Obama win is likely in the long-run, it may drain the energy from other pursuits.

8. Warming is global but all politics are local…

Among those casualties of health care reform is likely to be getting a climate bill out of the Congress this year. The Administration is pulling out the stops (to their credit) behind Waxman-Markey… but insiders say what with health care in the way, a deal in the Senate is unlikely before the Copenhagen summit in December. The U.S. will therefore go in saying "this is what we might be able to do" which could be a great negotiating ploy or a real problem if it pushes China and the developing countries to say, "we won't commit until you do… and even then we'll need a long runway to hard limits." This is a signature issue for the president and it looks like it won't happen till 2010 in the best case.

9. Hillary's fracture was not the first in the administration…

Hillary falls and breaks her elbow…and some people in White House offices are amused and making jokes. In fact, some folks in the State Department are doing likewise. Why, because the one big happy family fantasy that every administration enters with is starting to morph into a more typical reality. First leaked shots against Jim Jones. Then same against HRC. Even early signs of jockeying to replace what some see as a likely Jones departure in a year or two. (Go for the Trifecta on Rice, Steinberg and Holbrooke to win, place and show. But who finishes first? Only Dennis McDonough knows for sure.)

10. The "politics of change" succumbs to politics as usual…

The honeymoon is over when you have to roll up and put away your old campaign slogans. As the big donors start measuring the curtains for their embassies worldwide, it's clear that "the politics of change" has been overtaken by events…like the big fund-raising events which feature the president slipping through loopholes in order to appear to turn away from lobbyist money while actually raising bucks for the party the old fashioned way.

And, of course, because the intractable problems keep piling up in the president's inbox and the responses to them inevitably make them the unwanted property of this president rather than merely a legacy from the last, I could easily make a much longer list. Pakistan is an incurable and deepening mess. So's Afghanistan. Our guy on the ground in Baghdad is calling the departure of U.S. troops a victory for the Iraqi people. Our strongest vote of confidence in the Middle East comes from Hamas leaders who are absolutely certain to screw us the minute negotiations get tough. The global economy is still on life support. California is tanking.

Other signs the days of moonlight and violins are over? You can only buy one puppy per term of office. (I think it's in the constitution.) Michelle can't carry him forever. Biden fatigue. And of course, the number one reason of them all: it's just plain time for the honeymoon to be over anyway.

That's 20 reasons off the top of my head. To me that is as convincing a message as my first wife barfing into the private dip pool in Grenada while abandoned Cuban military vehicles rusted in the distance. The honeymoon is done. Time for a real life marriage. For better or for worse.

http://rothkopf.foreignpolicy.com/posts/20…n_is_over_story

[0100011]

Obama va faire coucou à Kasparov histoire de faire la nique à Medvedev : http://www.theotherrussia.org/2009/07/03/o…ian-opposition/

President Barack Obama has invited several prominent members of the Russian opposition, including United Civil Front leader Garry Kasparov, for a meeting in Moscow. Boris Nemtsov, a chair of the Solidarity opposition movement, has also been invited to the meeting, set to take place on July 7th at the Ritz Carlton hotel. The format of the event was still unclear.

“Of course, this will be interesting,” Kasparov said on the Ekho Moskvy radio station. “The previous American administration didn’t dare to do this.”

A number of other prominent figures have also been invited, including Pravoe Delo (Right Cause) co-chair Leonid Gozman, Communist Party leader Gennady Zyuganov, attorney Yelena Lukyanova, and Federation Council chairman Sergey Mironov.

Obama will travel to Moscow on July 6th for meetings with the Kremlin as well as business and civil society leaders. A meeting with Russia’s leading human rights advocates has been scheduled at the Metropol hotel, the location of a consultation between representatives from NGOs in the US and Russia.

Earlier, Boris Nemtsov argued that it was essential for Obama to meet with opposition forces in Russia. “If the White House agrees to Putin’s suggestion to speak only with pro-Putin organizations… this will mean that Putin has won, but not only that: Putin will become be assured that Obama is weak,” he said.

Nemtsov, who spoke at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, said the American administration should lay their stakes on President Dmitri Medvedev, and not Prime Minister Putin.

“I believe that if Medvedev finally takes power into his own hands, we will have a chance to return to a political thaw, to democratization,” he went on. “We are being given the chance to return to rule of law and the Russian Constitution. Clearly, much depends on the opposition, on its energy… Which is why we alone are responsible for our future, and not Obama.”

[Tortue joviale]

Les Etats-Unis ouvrent la voie à un second plan de relance

.

Une proche conseillère de Barack Obama estime qu’une seconde initiative, basée notamment sur les infrastructures, serait la bienvenue.

Barack Obama pourrait s’inspirer de la politique de grands travaux mise en place par Roosevelt en 1933 avec son célèbre «New Deal» et qui avait mis l’accent sur le développement des travaux publics. Le second plan de relance que semble préparer l’équipe du président pourrait du coup reprendre certaines grandes lignes du programme créé par ses aïeuls. C’est en tout cas ce que laisse entendre Laura Tyson, membre de la Commission de conseil économique de Barack Obama. Alors que le premier plan de relance de 787 milliards de dollars promulgué en février dernier incluait «un montant significatif d’investissements pour la croissance à long terme», le second mettrait plutôt l’accent sur les travaux publics.

Selon la conseillère de la Maison-Blanche, il est «encore trop tôt pour quantifier le montant d’un second plan, mais «nous en aurons une meilleure idée d’ici la fin de l’année». Tyson a également indiqué que le déficit budgétaire du pays --qui est déjà le plus important depuis la Seconde Guerre mondiale-- pourrait s’aggraver plus que prévu cette année et dépasser la prévision précédente de 12% du PIB. Autre crainte des analystes : celle d’une augmentation du déficit à long terme suite à l’injection de nouveaux capitaux sur les marchés. La conseillère a tenu à souligner que son avis n’engage qu’elle, mais son influence auprès du président américain laisse croire qu’on se dirige effectivement vers le plan de relance qu’elle semble préconiser.

http://www.jdf.com/taux-devises/2009/07/07…-de-relance.php

[G7H+]

[Luciole]

Excellent

[Apollon]

pfff ils n'ont pas pu s'empêcher de resservir le Hussein. Une chose est certaine : l'idolatrie d'Obama a justifié en réaction un fanatisme en sens inverse, qui ne vaut guère mieux.

[Apollon]

Et alors ? C'est son nom.

Pas son nom d'usage. Tenter de le stigmatiser sur son second nom arabe qui coïncide avec celui d'un certain dictateur c'est juste minable.

[Glockinette]

Pas son nom d'usage. Tenter de le stigmatiser sur son second nom arabe qui coïncide avec celui d'un certain dictateur c'est juste minable.

Honnêtement, je ne crois pas que BHO soit stigmatisé par qui que ce soit. Bien au contraire, il a plutôt tendance à être mis sur un piédestal par les médias (à l'exception notable de Fox). S'il y a eu -pendant la campagne et encore aujourdhui- un manque d'objectivité à l'égard de Barack H. Obama, ce fût très clairement en sa faveur et non en sa défaveur.

[Apollon]

Honnêtement, je ne crois pas que BHO soit stigmatisé par qui que ce soit. Bien au contraire, il a plutôt tendance à être mis sur un piédestal par les médias (à l'exception notable de Fox). S'il y a eu -pendant la campagne et encore aujourdhui- un manque d'objectivité à l'égard de Barack H. Obama, ce fût très clairement en sa faveur et non en sa défaveur.

Je ne dis nulle part le contraire. En fait je ne vois même pas le rapport avec ce que j'ai dit.

[Glockinette]

Je ne vois pas où est le problème de l'appeler par son nom.

Il n'y a rien de fanatique à cela.

[G7H+]

Je ne vois pas où est le problème de l'appeler par son nom.

Selon Apollon, il ne s'agit pas de son nom, précisement. Ici, "nom" signifiant nom d'usage. Un peu comme on utilise le nom Bill Clinton, pas William Clinton et Ron Paul, pas Ronald Ernest Paul.

Mais bon, tu avais très bien compris, je ne vois pas pourquoi j'écris ça, moi. Allez, je vais aller me coucher.

[Glockinette]

Allez, au lit.

Bonne nuit.

[Vincemobile]

Amusante l'affiche. Pour reprendre sur les media, ils sont en général sur la ligne Obama (soutien de l'économie, soutien au green business…). J'ai fait quelques semaines au Etats-Unis récemment et c'était tout simplement dingue de voir toutes les chaînes parler de développement durable. Sur Fox, il font du Fox : c'est violent, souvent de mauvaise foi mais c'est signe d'une vraie capacité à s'opposer au pouvoir en place. Quand on voit la nullité et la servilité des media français face au gouvernement (voir le publi-reportage à la gloire de Sarkozy dans le Nouvel Obs), on se dit que ça manque ce genre de contre-pouvoir.

Sur le fond, Obama est clairement interventionniste mais à sa décharge c'est ce que les électeurs et Wall Street lui ont demandé (il n'a pas menti sur ses intentions contrairement à Roosevelt qui se présentait comme un libéral en 1932). Pour le moment, il fait surtout du soutien à la conjoncture par l'investissement public ce qui ne sert à rien puisque la crise sera finie quand les premiers coups de pioche seront donnés. Sur les sauvetages de GM ou Chrysler, je ne pense honnêtement pas que Mc Cain aurait laissé faire faillite ces entreprises. Sur l'intervention de la FED, évidemment on ne peut que s'opposer à la production massive de monnaie. C'est pour moi l'aspect le plus négatif de la politique économique menée (gare à l'inflation).

Mais son interventionnisme affiché et surtout sa personnalité ont réussi l'essentiel : rassurer. D'ailleurs, j'ai vu les prévisions de croissance du FMI pour les 2 prochaines années et ce n'est pas trop mal (je m'attendais à bien pire) :

USA : -2,6% (2008), 0,8% (2009)

D : -6,2% (2008), 0,6% (2009)

J : -6% (2008), 1,7% (2009)

Vu la crise qui a touché les Etats-Unis on a encore une fois la preuve de la capacité de rebond incroyable des Américains. Ils ont une capacité géniale à aller de l'avant, à se remettre en cause et à se projeter dans le futur sans ressasser le passé. C'est ce qui m'a le plus frappé chez eux lors de mon petit séjour (il y en a d'autres mais ce n'est pas le sujet ici).

[john_ross]

USA : -2,6% (2008), 0,8% (2009)

Avec un plan de relance de 13% du PIB c'est catastrophique.

[Vincemobile]

USA : -2,6% (2008), 0,8% (2009)

Avec un plan de relance de 13% du PIB c'est catastrophique.

Oui et non car ses effets ne se font pas encore sentir (le temps de lancer les chantiers). Ces résultats me semblent être le fruit d'un retour à une certaine confiance et la capacité de rebond du peuple américain.

Sur le plan de relance, je serai curieux de voir à la fin la part de l'argent débloqué qui sera réellement injecté dans l'économie. Il y a aussi une grosse part d'effet d'annonce et de com destinée à rassurer les agents économiques.

[Glockinette]

Vu la crise qui a touché les Etats-Unis on a encore une fois la preuve de la capacité de rebond incroyable des Américains. Ils ont une capacité géniale à aller de l'avant, à se remettre en cause et à se projeter dans le futur sans ressasser le passé. C'est ce qui m'a le plus frappé chez eux lors de mon petit séjour (il y en a d'autres mais ce n'est pas le sujet ici).

C'est vrai en général; mais cela n'a, à mon avis, rien à voir avec Obama. Je ne partage pas votre enthousiasme à son sujet.

[Glockinette]

Sur Fox, il font du Fox : c'est violent, souvent de mauvaise foi mais c'est signe d'une vraie capacité à s'opposer au pouvoir en place.

. Fox, violent? Les principes de la chaine, c'est d'être fair, balanced, and accurate - et c'est exactement ce que Fox essaye d'être (qui est totalement de bonne foi, de toute façon? ). Prenez Greta Van Susteren, très modérée et impartiale. Ou Alan Colmes, franchement de gauche. Ils ont leur place sur Fox au même titre qu'Hannity.

[Vincemobile]

C'est vrai en général; mais cela n'a, à mon avis, rien à voir avec Obama. Je ne partage pas votre enthousiasme à son sujet.

Tout à fait d'accord, Obama n'y pour rien sur cet aspect "culturel". Je garde par contre mon enthousiasme là-dessus parce que franchement je les envie nos amis Américains sur cet aspect. Ca change de la France…