Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Rachel Maddow does a fine job reporting on President Obama receiving the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize.
Category: America
President Obama Wins the Nobel Peace Prize: It’s About Hope
(PHOTO: ENEWSPF)
The news of President Barack Obama has circulated and percolated throughout the world for just over three hours now. I’m not even taking a look at what anyone on the far right is saying at this point. No doubt the right wingnuts now have to figure out how to turn this into a political liability for Obama. That should be interesting to watch.
Here’s the fact: President Barack Obama has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
Why?
Many on the right and the left and those more moderate are asking themselves this question. No doubt President Obama is asking himself the same questions right now. As a friend on Facebook commented, "Here’s hoping Obama’s real reaction upon hearing the news this morning was, like everyone else’s, ‘WTF?’ "
I have not yet begun to survey opinion from around the world. I can only offer my own assessment. Yes, it’s true that Obama did not succeed in locking the Olympic bid for Chicago, but, in all honesty, is Chicago ready to join the Federation? (Yes, that’s the Trekker in me.) The Olympic bid was more about Rio de Janeiro. After Chicago lost in the first round of voting, the votes went overwhelmingly for Rio.
Chicago 2016 was not about Obama. It was about a young man beaten to death in the streets of Chicago just a week before the vote. It was about the many, many doubts regarding the ability of Chicago politicians to do the Olympics honestly.
To begin, I don’t think we as Americans have the least understanding how world opinion about the United States has shifted since the November 2008 election. No, we’re not out of the woods yet. But consider this from Reuters:
The United States is the most admired country globally thanks largely to the star power of President Barack Obama and his administration, according to a new poll.
It climbed from seventh place last year, ahead of France, Germany, theUnited Kingdom and Japan which completed the top five nations in the Nation Brand Index (NBI).
"What’s really remarkable is that in all my years studying national reputation, I have never seen any country experience such a dramatic change in its standing as we see for the United States for 2009," saidSimon Anholt, the founder of NBI, which measured the global image of 50 countries each year.
He believes that during the previous administration of George W. Bush the United States suffered in the world ranking with its unpopularforeign policies but since Obama was elected, and despite the recent economic turmoil, the country’s status has risen globally.
"There is no other explanation," Anholt said in an interview, referring to the impact of Obama.
The Obama Administration means the return of diplomacy to the world stage. From the New York Times:
The Nobel Committee announced in Oslo that it has awarded the annual peace prize to Barack Obama, just nine months into his presidency, “for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples.”The award cited in particular Mr. Obama’s effort to reduce the world’s nuclear arsenal. “He has created a new international climate,” the committee said.
The announcement shocked people from Norway to the White House. “There has been no discussion, nothing at all,” said Rahm Emanuel, the president’s chief of staff, in a brief telephone interview.
Mr. Emanuel said that he had not yet spoken directly to the president. A senior administration official said in an e-mail message that his press secretary, Robert Gibbs Mr. Gibbs called the White House shortly before 6 a.m. and woke the president with the news.
“The president was humbled to be selected by the committee,” the official said, without adding anything further.
The White House has made no official comment.
I don’t think we as Americans realize how far we had fallen in the eyes of the world during the Bush Administration. This year’s Nobel Peace Prize is about America regaining honor and respect throughout the world. At least to a point. This prize is as much about the future as it is the past. My students asked, "What has he done? He just got elected!" But the committee is not simply recognizing Obama’s accomplishments as president. Obama has spent his adult life in service to others. As a United States Senator, Obama was campaigning for a return to diplomacy, for a radical shift in United States foreign policy. He has begun to implement the siesmic shift in policy we need in this country and throughout the world: a return to diplomacy.
Have we arrived? No. The United States is still mired in two wars. Iran — the government, not all Iranians — is still a threat.
The last president labeled himself a "war president." May this award be a constant reminder to President Obama that it is possible to strive, every day, to be a "peace president."
French President Nicolas French President Nicolas Sarkozy said today President Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize marks "America’s return to the hearts of the people of the world."
Are Obama’s — and America’s — greatest days ahead?
The world hopes so. This award is about that hope.
President Barack Obama Wins Nobel Peace Prize
President Barack Obama won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize on Friday for “his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples,” the Norwegian Nobel Committee said, citing his outreach to the Muslim world and attempts to curb nuclear proliferation.
The stunning choice made Obama the third sitting U.S. president to win the Nobel Peace Prize and shocked Nobel observers because Obama took office less than two weeks before the Feb. 1 nomination deadline. Obama’s name had been mentioned in speculation before the award but many Nobel watchers believed it was too early to award the president.
Speculation had focused on Zimbabwe’s Prime Minister Morgan Tsvangirai, a Colombian senator and a Chinese dissident, along with an Afghan woman’s rights activist.
Yes, I’m stunned.
UCLA Student Hospitalized After Fellow Student Slashes Her Throat
Why do we gravitate toward the most violent stories in the news? I do it too. I was just reading the Chicago Tribune online, looking at local stories, national stories, and this was the story I clicked to read:
A female UCLA student was hospitalized Thursday after a fellow student slashed her throat in a chemistry lab on campus, authorities said.
A man was arrested after UCLA police got a call about the stabbing Thursday afternoon in Young Hall.
UCLA spokesman Phil Hampton said the victim and suspect were among a group of students working in the undergraduate teaching lab at the time. They are both 20-year-old seniors.
Officers were interviewing 30 to 40 witnesses who were in or near the lab and might have seen the attack, Campus Police Assistant Chief Jeff Young said. No names have been released, and the motive is under investigation.
The woman was being treated for multiple stab wounds at Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center. Her condition was not immediately known.
So why did I gravitate to the most gruesome story in the Trib?
This is very sad.
One student who was inside the lab when the attack occurred shortly after noon told The Times that he looked up as the assailant appeared to repeatedly punch the victim. Then the man calmly turned and walked away as the victim lay bleeding profusely.
Law enforcement sources said some type of verbal altercation occurred just before the attack, but the relationship, if any, between the assailant and the victim was unclear.
Witnesses said they saw a woman staggering out of the sixth-floor Young Hall lab with a teacher’s assistant applying pressure to her bloody neck moments after the attack, which was reported at 12:21 p.m.
Ugh.
Students and faculty “are obviously very shaken” by the incident, Garrell said. “It’s very shocking,” according to the LA Times.
Here’s to a complete recovery, although something like this will linger for a long, long time. Personally, and at UCLA.
Keith Olbermann’s Closing Commentary on Health Care Reform
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
If you missed Countdown tonight, at least watch the last 11 minutes of tonight’s show, which was dedicated in its entirety to a call for health care reform.
I was expecting a rant. Instead, Keith personalized the issue by talking about his father. This was no rant.
Olbermann’s right. We need the medical community on our side.
Go to MSNBC to watch the entire show.
Evidence Builds that Marijuana is Safe, Effective
I’m going to simply run this release in its entirety:
The International Association for Cannabis as Medicine just concluded its 5th Conference on Cannabinoids in Medicine in Cologne, Germany. The conference included significant new evidence that marijuana is a safe, effective medicine for certain conditions, some of which can be found in the conference abstracts, now available online.
Canadian researcher Mark Ware presented results of a yearlong safety study known as the COMPASS study, which compared 215 patients who used marijuana to manage chronic pain with comparable control patients who did not use marijuana. Ware and colleagues report “no difference in serious adverse events” between the two groups, concluding, “Cannabis use for chronic pain over one year is not associated with major changes in lung, endocrine, cognitive function or serious adverse events.”
A much-awaited study came from the University of California, San Francisco, where Donald Abrams and colleagues tested the effects of adding marijuana to the therapeutic regimen of chronic pain patients on long-term morphine or oxycodone therapy. Unfortunately, because the researchers were crunching numbers right up until the conference, the abstract doesn’t include a lot of details. But the study shows that marijuana did indeed add significant pain relief on top of that already provided by the narcotic painkillers. The scientists conclude, “Cannabinoids may augment the analgesic effects of opioids, allowing longer treatment at lower doses with fewer side effects.”
Meanwhile, British researchers added to the body of evidence indicating that marijuana can aid the treatment of multiple sclerosis. Two-hundred and seventy-nine patients received either a standardized cannabis extract, given orally, or a placebo. Patients receiving the extract were twice as likely to experience relief of muscle stiffness, and also reported relief of body pain, spasms, and sleep problems.
Source: mpp.org
Tip of the hat to eNews Park Forest for this.
McChrystal is not Obama’s Grant
Lieutenant General Stanley McChrystal was promoted to top commander in Afghanistan in May, 2009. He replaced General David McKiernan, who had been calling for big troop increases in the months before he was relieved. McChrystal has been calling for troop increases as well, taking his campaign public in recent weeks.
After complaining to the media that he did not have enough access to the president, McChrystal had a personal 25-minute summit aboard Air Force One with the Commander in Chief last week:
President Obama squeezed a 25-minute council of war into his Copenhagen visit yesterday, meeting General Stanley McChrystal aboard Air Force One before returning to Washington.
The general was summoned to the airborne White House on the day it was announced that four more British and American servicemen had died in Afghanistan. He was on his way back to Kabul from London, where he made a powerful public pitch for more troops to be sent to the battlefields.
Until yesterday, General McChrystal had been in direct contact with Mr Obama only twice since taking up his post as Nato commander in Kabul six months ago – once via video link to the Oval Office and then as a participant in a major Afghan strategy meeting on Wednesday, again via videolink.
Since arriving in Kabul, General McChrystal has written a damning assessment of the Afghan security situation, and an election marred by widespread fraud has undermined the case for propping up the regime of President Hamid Karzai.
The runway summit happened after McChrystal gave a speech in London pointedly criticizing the president and United States policy in Afghanistan:
When asked on CNN about the commander’s public lobbying for more troops, Gen Jim Jones, national security adviser, said:
“Ideally, it’s better for military advice to come up through the chain of command.”
Asked if the president had told the general to tone down his remarks, he told CBS: “I wasn’t there so I can’t answer that question. But it was an opportunity for them to get to know each other a little bit better. I am sure they exchanged direct views.”
An adviser to the administration said: “People aren’t sure whether McChrystal is being naïve or an upstart. To my mind he doesn’t seem ready for this Washington hard-ball and is just speaking his mind too plainly.”
In London, Gen McChrystal, who heads the 68,000 US troops in Afghanistan as well as the 100,000 Nato forces, flatly rejected proposals to switch to a strategy more reliant on drone missile strikes and special forces operations against al-Qaeda.
He told the Institute of International and Strategic Studies that the formula, which is favoured by Vice-President Joe Biden, would lead to “Chaos-istan”.
When asked whether he would support it, he said: “The short answer is: No.”
He went on to say: “Waiting does not prolong a favorable outcome. This effort will not remain winnable indefinitely, and nor will public support.”;
President Abraham Lincoln fired no less than five generals before he “found his Grant,” as T. Harry Williams wrote in Lincoln and His Generals
Yet Lincoln and His Generals
(Citation is from Time Magazine review)
Donald T. Phillips explores this further in Lincoln on Leadership: Executive Strategies for Tough Times
President Obama is still seeking his General Grant for Afghanistan. McChrystal spouting off one-liners in public speeches is less than appropriate for a person of his stature.
President Obama must keep searching for his Grant. Our troops and the American people deserve no less.
As Afghanistan Enters Year 9, We Tally the Cost of War
It’s time to take stock of the numbers again, as the war in Afghanistan enters its ninth year Tuesday.
Our National Debt stands at $11,930,445,364,162.68 as of this writing. That’s a tad under $12 trillion.
The Total Cost of War since the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan began is currently $917,149,614,395. That’s just under $1 trillion. $688,690,605,993 has been spent in Iraq, $228,459,269,025 in Afghanistan. If the numbers don’t add up, that’s because the counter at CostofWar.com is constantly moving. The total right now is $917,150,203,805.
Yes, they’re pretty accurate. Here’s more about the counters:
The numbers indicate all of the approved funding for the wars to date. In addition to this approved amount, the FY2010 budget shows a $130 billion request for more war spending. This would bring total war spending in Iraq and Afghanistan to more than $1 trillion. When all FY2010 war-related amounts are approved, we will adjust the counters so that they reach the new totals at the end of FY2010.
If you should compare the amount displayed on the Cost of War counters with the numbers available in our information sheets, please note that the information sheets include all war spending to date, the same number that the counters will reach at the end of the 2009 fiscal year.
Total War Funding since 2001
To date, $915.1 billion dollars have been allocated to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. This counter is designed so that on September 30, 2009, the end of the federal government’s 2009 fiscal year, the counter will reach that total number. Likewise, counters found here for states and towns will also reach their portion of this number at the end of FY2009.
Cost of War in Iraq since 2003
To date, $687 billion dollars have been allocated to the war in Iraq since 2003. This counter is designed so that on September 30, 2009, the end of the federal government’s 2009 fiscal year, the counter will reach that total number. Please note that the cost of war in Iraq has decreased since our last estimate. This is because a larger proportion of spending was allocated to Afghanistan than originally estimated.
Cost of War in Afghanistan since 2001
To date, $228 billion dollars have been allocated to the war in Afghanistan since 2001. This counter is designed so that on September 30, 2009, the end of the federal government’s 2009 fiscal year, the counter will reach that total number. To learn more about the cost of war in Afghanistan, see our April 2009 publication.
Here’s the Cost of War in Iraq:
Here’s the Cost of War in Afghanistan:
Here is the total of both wars combined:
Now, the human loss…
4,347 Americans have died in Iraq since the war began on March 19, 2003. 3,475 of them died in combat.
869 Americans have died in Afghanistan. 219 from the UK died in Afghanistan, 356 from other countries, for a total of 1,444 dead on the coalition side.
Somewhere between 93,345 and 101,862 Iraqi civilians have died in the war in Iraq. That’s civilians. Just Foreign Policy puts the total number of civilians due to the war at 1,339,771.
The Washington Post currently lists 5,130 Americans dead in both wars, and has pictures of all of the fallen.
President Obama, these are your wars now.
Franklin D. Roosevelt: “The Economic Bill of Rights”
This was once America, rescued at last from the gilded age.
We can do this again. We can revive and seal the New Deal.
The rich were on board because they had lived through the Great Depression, and they knew a thriving middle class was the path to the future of a strong America. Less for a few meant more for all.
Let’s make this happen again.
It is our duty now to begin to lay the plans and determine the strategy for the winning of a lasting peace and the establishment of an American standard of living higher than ever before known. We cannot be content, no matter how high that general standard of living may be, if some fraction of our people—whether it be one-third or one-fifth or one-tenth—is ill-fed, ill-clothed, ill-housed, and insecure.
This Republic had its beginning, and grew to its present strength, under the protection of certain inalienable political rights—among them the right of free speech, free press, free worship, trial by jury, freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. They were our rights to life and liberty.
As our nation has grown in size and stature, however—as our industrial economy expanded—these political rights proved inadequate to assure us equality in the pursuit of happiness.
We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.
In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.
Among these are:
The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;
The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;
The right of every family to a decent home;
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;
The right to a good education.
All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.
America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens.
source: The Public Papers & Addresses of Franklin D. Roosevelt (Samuel Rosenman, ed.), Vol XIII (NY: Harper, 1950), 40-42
61-year-old William Michael Grant Dies Trying to Retrieve Golf Ball
Okay, so I passed this up the first time I saw it and did not blog about it. I thought, well, give the guy a break.
But then it came back today, this time in the Sun-Times:
A Texas golfer died after he fell over an embankment while trying to retrieve his golf ball.
Richardson police Sgt. Kevin Perlich says 61-year-old William Michael Grant was playing in a golf tournament Friday at Sherrill Park Golf Course when he overshot a green.
Police say Grant was trying to get his ball when witnesses saw him slip and fall about 10 feet. Perlich says it appears Grant broke his neck.
Rest in peace, Mr. Grant. May you find greener courses, and hit many a hole in one.