Anybody think this bank will exist a year from now?
(Reuters) - Citigroup Inc Chairman Richard Parsons said Thursday that the bank does not need any more capital injections from the government and expressed confidence that Citi would remain in private hands.
Asked in an interview with Reuters whether Citigroup needed additional government capital injections, Parsons said: 'No, I think actually, particularly with the latest conversion ... Citi is actually one of the better capitalized banks in the world.'"
Friday, March 13, 2009
China Pressures US: Take Your Pick --- Depression or Hyperinflation
China’s Wen ‘Worried’ on Safety of Treasuries, Seeks Assurances - Bloomberg.com:
Click through and read the short article, but be sure you're sitting down first.
“China is worried that the U.S. may solve its problems by printing money, which will stoke inflation,” said Zhao Qingming, a Beijing-based analyst at China Construction Bank Corp., the country’s second-biggest lender. “If the U.S. can make sure this won’t happen, then China will continue to invest.”
Click through and read the short article, but be sure you're sitting down first.
“China is worried that the U.S. may solve its problems by printing money, which will stoke inflation,” said Zhao Qingming, a Beijing-based analyst at China Construction Bank Corp., the country’s second-biggest lender. “If the U.S. can make sure this won’t happen, then China will continue to invest.”
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Papal Infallibility Bites the Dust?
Pope 'admits Holocaust row error':
"Pope Benedict XVI has admitted to mistakes in lifting the excommunication of a Holocaust-denying bishop, according to reports."
"Pope Benedict XVI has admitted to mistakes in lifting the excommunication of a Holocaust-denying bishop, according to reports."
AIPAC Notches Gun Belt: Freeman out at NIC, shot down by Alledged Spy Steven Rosen, past director of American Israel Political Affairs Committee
Foreign Policy has posted Charles Freeman's withdrawal statement quoted in full at the end of this post.
Freeman, Obama's pick to chair the National Security Council, would have brought an independent perspective on foreign policy in general and the Mid East especially. As such his views could not be tolerated by the powerful Israeli right-wing lobbying group AIPAC.
For a brief rundown on the dust-up see this fine post from Freeman's son (and oft time political opponent.)
For a great deal more detail via Max Bleumenthal go here.
Wikipedia offers the following brief about Rosen, AIPAC, and espionage.
Here's Freeman's statement on withdrawing.
Freeman, Obama's pick to chair the National Security Council, would have brought an independent perspective on foreign policy in general and the Mid East especially. As such his views could not be tolerated by the powerful Israeli right-wing lobbying group AIPAC.
For a brief rundown on the dust-up see this fine post from Freeman's son (and oft time political opponent.)
For a great deal more detail via Max Bleumenthal go here.
Wikipedia offers the following brief about Rosen, AIPAC, and espionage.
In April 2005, AIPAC policy director Steven Rosen and AIPAC senior Iran analyst Keith Weissman were fired by AIPAC amid an FBI investigation into whether they passed classified U.S. information received from Franklin on to the government of Israel. They were later indicted for illegally conspiring to gather and disclose classified national security information to Israel. [21][22]
In May 2005, the Justice Department announced that Lawrence Anthony Franklin, a U.S. Air Force Reserves colonel working as a Department of Defense analyst at the Pentagon in the office of Douglas Feith, had been arrested and charged by the FBI with providing classified national defense information to Israel. The six-count criminal complaint did not identify AIPAC by name, but described a luncheon meeting in which, allegedly, Franklin disclosed top-secret information to two AIPAC officials.Here's Freeman's statement on withdrawing.
You will by now have seen the statement by Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair reporting that I have withdrawn my previous acceptance of his invitation to chair the National Intelligence Council.
I have concluded that the barrage of libelous distortions of my record would not cease upon my entry into office. The effort to smear me and to destroy my credibility would instead continue. I do not believe the National Intelligence Council could function effectively while its chair was under constant attack by unscrupulous people with a passionate attachment to the views of a political faction in a foreign country. I agreed to chair the NIC to strengthen it and protect it against politicization, not to introduce it to efforts by a special interest group to assert control over it through a protracted political campaign.
As those who know me are well aware, I have greatly enjoyed life since retiring from government. Nothing was further from my mind than a return to public service. When Admiral Blair asked me to chair the NIC I responded that I understood he was “asking me to give my freedom of speech, my leisure, the greater part of my income, subject myself to the mental colonoscopy of a polygraph, and resume a daily commute to a job with long working hours and a daily ration of political abuse.” I added that I wondered “whether there wasn’t some sort of downside to this offer.” I was mindful that no one is indispensable; I am not an exception. It took weeks of reflection for me to conclude that, given the unprecedentedly challenging circumstances in which our country now finds itself abroad and at home, I had no choice but accept the call to return to public service. I thereupon resigned from all positions that I had held and all activities in which I was engaged. I now look forward to returning to private life, freed of all previous obligations.
I am not so immodest as to believe that this controversy was about me rather than issues of public policy. These issues had little to do with the NIC and were not at the heart of what I hoped to contribute to the quality of analysis available to President Obama and his administration. Still, I am saddened by what the controversy and the manner in which the public vitriol of those who devoted themselves to sustaining it have revealed about the state of our civil society. It is apparent that we Americans cannot any longer conduct a serious public discussion or exercise independent judgment about matters of great importance to our country as well as to our allies and friends.
The libels on me and their easily traceable email trails show conclusively that there is a powerful lobby determined to prevent any view other than its own from being aired, still less to factor in American understanding of trends and events in the Middle East. The tactics of the Israel Lobby plumb the depths of dishonor and indecency and include character assassination, selective misquotation, the willful distortion of the record, the fabrication of falsehoods, and an utter disregard for the truth. The aim of this Lobby is control of the policy process through the exercise of a veto over the appointment of people who dispute the wisdom of its views, the substitution of political correctness for analysis, and the exclusion of any and all options for decision by Americans and our government other than those that it favors.
There is a special irony in having been accused of improper regard for the opinions of foreign governments and societies by a group so clearly intent on enforcing adherence to the policies of a foreign government – in this case, the government of Israel. I believe that the inability of the American public to discuss, or the government to consider, any option for US policies in the Middle East opposed by the ruling faction in Israeli politics has allowed that faction to adopt and sustain policies that ultimately threaten the existence of the state of Israel. It is not permitted for anyone in the United States to say so. This is not just a tragedy for Israelis and their neighbors in the Middle East; it is doing widening damage to the national security of the United States.
The outrageous agitation that followed the leak of my pending appointment will be seen by many to raise serious questions about whether the Obama administration will be able to make its own decisions about the Middle East and related issues. I regret that my willingness to serve the new administration has ended by casting doubt on its ability to consider, let alone decide what policies might best serve the interests of the United States rather than those of a Lobby intent on enforcing the will and interests of a foreign government.
In the court of public opinion, unlike a court of law, one is guilty until proven innocent. The speeches from which quotations have been lifted from their context are available for anyone interested in the truth to read. The injustice of the accusations made against me has been obvious to those with open minds. Those who have sought to impugn my character are uninterested in any rebuttal that I or anyone else might make.
Still, for the record: I have never sought to be paid or accepted payment from any foreign government, including Saudi Arabia or China, for any service, nor have I ever spoken on behalf of a foreign government, its interests, or its policies. I have never lobbied any branch of our government for any cause, foreign or domestic. I am my own man, no one else’s, and with my return to private life, I will once again – to my pleasure – serve no master other than myself. I will continue to speak out as I choose on issues of concern to me and other Americans.
I retain my respect and confidence in President Obama and DNI Blair. Our country now faces terrible challenges abroad as well as at home. Like all patriotic Americans, I continue to pray that our president can successfully lead us in surmounting them.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Welcome to the Death Spiral
Steve Benen at The Washington Monthly: posts the following graph (Via Jaun Cole)
Says Benen, "See that column on the far-right edge? That's where Obama proposes the marginal top-rate should be. It's also the rate conservatives believe is so outrageous, that they're accusing the president of 'socialism' and talking openly about the 'Going Galt' scenario in which wealthy and industrious Americans would deliberately make less money to spite their country. It's all quite silly, but the graph adds some helpful context to drive the point home. Obama is proposing a top rate lower than Reagan's first term, lower than Nixon's, lower than Eisenhower's, and lower than FDR's when he pulled us out of the Great Depression."
Couldn't Agree More!
Meanwhile in my little town some Board of Finance members are trying to force the Board of Eduation to reduce their proposed budget by an estimated amount of Federal Stimulus. Such an action would, of course, reduce the current balance of the Federal Stimulus package (60% stimulus and 40% tax cuts) as it plays out in our education budget to 100% tax cuts and 0% stimulus.
One resident, an annual opponent of any spending, accidentally realized the problem when he said that "We will be in a recession as long as GDP continues to shrink and it won't end until people start spending again." Then, in his very next sentence, he advocated shrinking our local spending! This is the common wisdom and I am sure our town is not the only one that faces this shortsightedness. Welcome to the Death Spiral!
Says Benen, "See that column on the far-right edge? That's where Obama proposes the marginal top-rate should be. It's also the rate conservatives believe is so outrageous, that they're accusing the president of 'socialism' and talking openly about the 'Going Galt' scenario in which wealthy and industrious Americans would deliberately make less money to spite their country. It's all quite silly, but the graph adds some helpful context to drive the point home. Obama is proposing a top rate lower than Reagan's first term, lower than Nixon's, lower than Eisenhower's, and lower than FDR's when he pulled us out of the Great Depression."Couldn't Agree More!
Meanwhile in my little town some Board of Finance members are trying to force the Board of Eduation to reduce their proposed budget by an estimated amount of Federal Stimulus. Such an action would, of course, reduce the current balance of the Federal Stimulus package (60% stimulus and 40% tax cuts) as it plays out in our education budget to 100% tax cuts and 0% stimulus.
One resident, an annual opponent of any spending, accidentally realized the problem when he said that "We will be in a recession as long as GDP continues to shrink and it won't end until people start spending again." Then, in his very next sentence, he advocated shrinking our local spending! This is the common wisdom and I am sure our town is not the only one that faces this shortsightedness. Welcome to the Death Spiral!
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Good Cop, Bad Cop? ....Obama and Pelosi
Bloomberg quotes an interesting comment from Phil Gingrey (R-GA) who thinks that Obama
“is trying to open up to Republicans. Quite honestly he needs to have a sit-down, heart-to-heart, come-to- Jesus talk with” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, on promoting bipartisanship. “Republicans respect this president, we like him, we want him to succeed, but we can’t be completely shut out of everything,”
Is Pelosi knowingly playing bad cop to Obama's good cop? If so she deserves a lot of credit...a whole lot!
“is trying to open up to Republicans. Quite honestly he needs to have a sit-down, heart-to-heart, come-to- Jesus talk with” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, on promoting bipartisanship. “Republicans respect this president, we like him, we want him to succeed, but we can’t be completely shut out of everything,”
Is Pelosi knowingly playing bad cop to Obama's good cop? If so she deserves a lot of credit...a whole lot!
Thursday, February 19, 2009
World Press Photo: Winner 2008 - US Foreclosures
Via The Independent:
"This picture by US photographer Anthony Suau, for Time won the World Press Photo of the Year 2008 award, it was announced by the organisers on 13 February 2009 in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. US Economy in Crisis: Following eviction, Detective Robert Kole must ensure residents have moved out of their home in Cleveland, Ohio, 26 March 2008.
A picture of an armed sheriff moving through an American home after an eviction due to a mortgage foreclosure was named World Press Photo of 2008 on Friday."
"This picture by US photographer Anthony Suau, for Time won the World Press Photo of the Year 2008 award, it was announced by the organisers on 13 February 2009 in Amsterdam, The Netherlands. US Economy in Crisis: Following eviction, Detective Robert Kole must ensure residents have moved out of their home in Cleveland, Ohio, 26 March 2008.
A picture of an armed sheriff moving through an American home after an eviction due to a mortgage foreclosure was named World Press Photo of 2008 on Friday."
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
Thanks TCM; Ponderings on The Gay Parisian, George Balanchine, and the Development of Neo-Classicism in Dance
Wow, I caught the last half of The Gay Parisian on Turner Classic Movies tonight and was fascinated and somewhat aghast at what I was seeing!
Right away I knew it was no movie musical I had ever seen and shortly I recognized Léonide Massine, being familiar with him from The Red Shoes. I kept thinking the musical number would end but it just continued from one dance to another and clicking the info button on the cable revealed that there was no listing for it (Turner Classics had sandwiched it between Flower Drum Song and Seven Brides for Seven Brothers) indicating that is was another interesting short that Turner had turned up.
The piece was costumed to within an inch of its life in a style that, today, could only be considered high kitsch and was full of rapid and sometimes choppy edits. The director was in love with obscuring the frame with just about anything he could place in the foreground; wrought iron metal work, columns, people walking/dancing within a foot or so of the lens. The dancers however, were first rate...Massine doing his typical quirky athletic thing, a woman in a can-can section (yes this dance truly has it all!) doing a few dozen fouettes in the most rapid and violent manner ever seen, yet very well centered.
When it finished and no credits were run I quickly IMDB'd Massine and soon found that it was a 20 minute Warner Brothers release in 1941 featuring The Ballet Russe de Monte Carlo with Andre Eglevski, Fredrick Franklin, Nathalie Krassovsk, Igor Youskevitch and more.
Turns out, oddly enough, that Warner Brothers had made two 20 minute films with the Ballet Russe de Monte Carlo that year the other being Spanish Fiesta with similar cast and crew but also featuring Tamara Toumanova and Alexandra Danivola; both were choreographed by Massine.
While the film, technically and choreographically, is difficult to watch today (at least it may be difficult keeping a straight face) its a wonderful and rare opportunity to watch some very famous dancers and to ponder the history of dance as popular entertainment and the counter action to that popular entertainment that led Balanchine (no slouch to pop, he choreographed for the Ziegfeld Follies of 1936 and created Slaughter on 10th Avenue in 1940) to revolutionize the world of dance in the mid 20th century.
The year when these two pictures were released, 1941, was also the year that Balanchine created Concerto Barocco a seminal ballet, perhaps the seminal ballet of the 20th century. Balanchine created the piece from an exercise for the School of American Ballet which he founded in 1935 with Lincoln Kirstein and set it on the American Ballet Caravan for its 1941 tour of South America. In it he finally abandons any pretense of story-telling and simply allows the music and movement to amplify one another, a concept now often referred to as neo-classicism.
Ted Shawn and Ruth St. Denis had explored the same basic concpet in Modern Dance starting around 1916 which they called Music Visualization and described (via Wikipedia) as "a concept that called for movement equivalents to the timbres, dynamics, and structural shapes of music in addition to its rhythmic base." Balanchine's revolution was to apply a similar idea to the technique of ballet, breaking it forever from the story-telling tradition in which it was becoming moribund.
This also led Ballet away from the world of popular entertainment (for contrast see the videos of Massine's Gay Parisian below) and into a much more "highbrow" cultural plain. He had begun to make the break from popular entertainment as early as 1928's Apollo, done in collaboration with with Stravinski, denfinatley cracking the mold. With Borocco and the jettisoning of story the mold was shattered. Ten years later he quite literally stripped dance to its essence when he removed the costumes and first presented Barocco in rehearsal clothes.
Today both Ballet and Modern are free to tell stories or not, to amplify the music or use no music at all, to be of utmost seriousness or to appeal directly as popular entertainment (although to me, they seem, like most of the arts, to be awaiting the next great revolution.)
Thanks Mr. B.
The Gay Parisian part 1
The Gay Parisian part 2
Right away I knew it was no movie musical I had ever seen and shortly I recognized Léonide Massine, being familiar with him from The Red Shoes. I kept thinking the musical number would end but it just continued from one dance to another and clicking the info button on the cable revealed that there was no listing for it (Turner Classics had sandwiched it between Flower Drum Song and Seven Brides for Seven Brothers) indicating that is was another interesting short that Turner had turned up.
The piece was costumed to within an inch of its life in a style that, today, could only be considered high kitsch and was full of rapid and sometimes choppy edits. The director was in love with obscuring the frame with just about anything he could place in the foreground; wrought iron metal work, columns, people walking/dancing within a foot or so of the lens. The dancers however, were first rate...Massine doing his typical quirky athletic thing, a woman in a can-can section (yes this dance truly has it all!) doing a few dozen fouettes in the most rapid and violent manner ever seen, yet very well centered.
When it finished and no credits were run I quickly IMDB'd Massine and soon found that it was a 20 minute Warner Brothers release in 1941 featuring The Ballet Russe de Monte Carlo with Andre Eglevski, Fredrick Franklin, Nathalie Krassovsk, Igor Youskevitch and more.
Turns out, oddly enough, that Warner Brothers had made two 20 minute films with the Ballet Russe de Monte Carlo that year the other being Spanish Fiesta with similar cast and crew but also featuring Tamara Toumanova and Alexandra Danivola; both were choreographed by Massine.
While the film, technically and choreographically, is difficult to watch today (at least it may be difficult keeping a straight face) its a wonderful and rare opportunity to watch some very famous dancers and to ponder the history of dance as popular entertainment and the counter action to that popular entertainment that led Balanchine (no slouch to pop, he choreographed for the Ziegfeld Follies of 1936 and created Slaughter on 10th Avenue in 1940) to revolutionize the world of dance in the mid 20th century.
Concerto Barocco an early costumed version.
The year when these two pictures were released, 1941, was also the year that Balanchine created Concerto Barocco a seminal ballet, perhaps the seminal ballet of the 20th century. Balanchine created the piece from an exercise for the School of American Ballet which he founded in 1935 with Lincoln Kirstein and set it on the American Ballet Caravan for its 1941 tour of South America. In it he finally abandons any pretense of story-telling and simply allows the music and movement to amplify one another, a concept now often referred to as neo-classicism.
Ted Shawn and Ruth St. Denis had explored the same basic concpet in Modern Dance starting around 1916 which they called Music Visualization and described (via Wikipedia) as "a concept that called for movement equivalents to the timbres, dynamics, and structural shapes of music in addition to its rhythmic base." Balanchine's revolution was to apply a similar idea to the technique of ballet, breaking it forever from the story-telling tradition in which it was becoming moribund.
This also led Ballet away from the world of popular entertainment (for contrast see the videos of Massine's Gay Parisian below) and into a much more "highbrow" cultural plain. He had begun to make the break from popular entertainment as early as 1928's Apollo, done in collaboration with with Stravinski, denfinatley cracking the mold. With Borocco and the jettisoning of story the mold was shattered. Ten years later he quite literally stripped dance to its essence when he removed the costumes and first presented Barocco in rehearsal clothes.
Today both Ballet and Modern are free to tell stories or not, to amplify the music or use no music at all, to be of utmost seriousness or to appeal directly as popular entertainment (although to me, they seem, like most of the arts, to be awaiting the next great revolution.)
Thanks Mr. B.
The Gay Parisian part 1
The Gay Parisian part 2
Obama Gets It...The Long View has Been Missing
The long view, the one that requires some sacrifice or at least some lessening of immediate gratification has been missing, not only from the government and corporations, but from the average American as well. I may not agree with all of Obama's tactics but he grasps the single most important aspect currently dooming our society.
Bob herbert in the NYT writes on a recent conversation with Obama:
"When asked about the sharp drop in the stock markets after Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner announced an expanded bank bailout plan last week, Mr. Obama replied:
“My job is to help the country take the long view — to make sure that not only are we getting out of this immediate fix, but we’re not repeating the same cycle of bubble and bust over and over again; that we’re not having the same energy conversation 30 years from now that we had 30 years ago; that we’re not talking about the state of our schools in the exact same ways we were talking about them in the 1980s; and that at some point we say, ‘You know what? If we’re spending more money per-capita on health care than any nation on earth, then you’d think everybody would have coverage and we would see lower costs for average consumers, and we’d have better outcomes.’ "
Bob herbert in the NYT writes on a recent conversation with Obama:
"When asked about the sharp drop in the stock markets after Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner announced an expanded bank bailout plan last week, Mr. Obama replied:
“My job is to help the country take the long view — to make sure that not only are we getting out of this immediate fix, but we’re not repeating the same cycle of bubble and bust over and over again; that we’re not having the same energy conversation 30 years from now that we had 30 years ago; that we’re not talking about the state of our schools in the exact same ways we were talking about them in the 1980s; and that at some point we say, ‘You know what? If we’re spending more money per-capita on health care than any nation on earth, then you’d think everybody would have coverage and we would see lower costs for average consumers, and we’d have better outcomes.’ "
Sign of the Times ...Gold Teeth For Sale
No comment needed
Gold teeth among items bought at 'Gold for Cash' in Danbury - NewsTimes.com: "DANBURY -- If you have any doubts that we're in a recession, just ask the guy who sold his gold teeth Saturday.
Yes, old gold teeth were among the items people sold at the Courtyard by Marriott on Eagle Road, where 'Gold 4 Cash' representatives were doing appraisals and making payments.
The company, affiliated with Midas Touch Jewelry in Fairfield, will be at the hotel Sunday and Monday.
Newtown's Drew Talbot, the 'Gold 4 Cash' marketing director, sat down for a Valentine's Day cash for gold question and answer."
Gold teeth among items bought at 'Gold for Cash' in Danbury - NewsTimes.com: "DANBURY -- If you have any doubts that we're in a recession, just ask the guy who sold his gold teeth Saturday.
Yes, old gold teeth were among the items people sold at the Courtyard by Marriott on Eagle Road, where 'Gold 4 Cash' representatives were doing appraisals and making payments.
The company, affiliated with Midas Touch Jewelry in Fairfield, will be at the hotel Sunday and Monday.
Newtown's Drew Talbot, the 'Gold 4 Cash' marketing director, sat down for a Valentine's Day cash for gold question and answer."
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Beauty and Aesthetics: If Joshua Bell Performs in a Subway Station Does Anone Listen?
A very interesting (long and worth it) read over at the WaPo posits this question:
Can one of the nation's great musicians cut through the fog of a D.C. rush hour? Let's find out.": An interesting discussion of beauty and aesthetics ensues.
Can one of the nation's great musicians cut through the fog of a D.C. rush hour? Let's find out.": An interesting discussion of beauty and aesthetics ensues.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Marcy Wheeler talks to Sheldon Whitehouse re: FISA, Holder, Wiretaps, and Statute of Limitations
Emptywheel (Marcy) once again taking Democracy into her own, very capable, hands.
For info on the statute of limitations and the apparent GOP tactic of running out the clock on possible prosecutions of various Bush era DOJ officials see her post at Emptywheel. Marcy contends that the GOP hold on the Holder nomination is intended to help run out that clock.
In this brief video she makes Senator Whitehouse aware of the situation and he promises to look into it. Let's Hope!
For a bit more background on Marcy see my previous post.
For info on the statute of limitations and the apparent GOP tactic of running out the clock on possible prosecutions of various Bush era DOJ officials see her post at Emptywheel. Marcy contends that the GOP hold on the Holder nomination is intended to help run out that clock.
In this brief video she makes Senator Whitehouse aware of the situation and he promises to look into it. Let's Hope!
For a bit more background on Marcy see my previous post.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Thanks Howard Dean! The 50 State Strategy Proved Rahm and the DCCC Wrong.
Marcy (otherwise known as Emptywheel) over at FireDogLake finally got her picture taken with Howard Dean. Her post is, as always, a good read.
Howard Dean invented the 50 state strategy, much to the Rahm and the DCCC's dismay, and as Chair of the Democratic Party implemented it vigorously which led eventually to Barack's victory. During the 2006 primaries Rahm burned a lot of bridges with the NetRoots Nation by supporting conservative Democrats against progressive NetRoots candidates.
Marcy, supported by Jane Hamsher at FireDogLake, became the go to person even for the MSM on the Scooter Libby Trial and in so doing took the final step of putting Bloggers on par with the MSM.
Check out Marcy's post!
Howard Dean invented the 50 state strategy, much to the Rahm and the DCCC's dismay, and as Chair of the Democratic Party implemented it vigorously which led eventually to Barack's victory. During the 2006 primaries Rahm burned a lot of bridges with the NetRoots Nation by supporting conservative Democrats against progressive NetRoots candidates.
Marcy, supported by Jane Hamsher at FireDogLake, became the go to person even for the MSM on the Scooter Libby Trial and in so doing took the final step of putting Bloggers on par with the MSM.
Check out Marcy's post!
Pick Yourself Up: Obama Inauguration Speech's Best Line Riffs on Dorothy Fields via Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers
Is Barack Obama now a not so secret Fred and Ginger fan?
Is it coincidence that Obama seems to have turned to a popular song written at the height of the Great Depression to find perhaps his most memorable line in today's inaugural speech?
Obama(2009),
"we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again"
Pick Yourself Up (1936) lyrics Dorothy Fields, music Jerome Kern,
And pick yourself up, Dust yourself off, Start all over again."
The movie Swing Time was released in 1936; the Depression was raging and Fred and Ginger were cranking out light entertainment for RKO featuring opulent settings, popular music, lots of dancing and oft times offering a few chuckles at the foibles of the upper crust. In the process they also created a body or work that is unsurpassed in the field of American Musical Movies and indeed Dance on Film.
Pick Yourself Up is introduced first in song as Fred hits on Ginger, a ballroom dance instructor, by pretending he can't dance, a bit later its used in a classic dance sequence as Fred tries to save Ginger's job by showing her boss that she has indeed taught him to dance (much to Ginger's surprise.)
Will Barack and Michele have a number up their sleeves ala Fred and Ginger for the Inauguration Ball this eve? We will have to wait and see, but in the meantime enjoy this clip; it just doesn't get any better than this!
Is it coincidence that Obama seems to have turned to a popular song written at the height of the Great Depression to find perhaps his most memorable line in today's inaugural speech?
Obama(2009),
"we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again"
Pick Yourself Up (1936) lyrics Dorothy Fields, music Jerome Kern,
And pick yourself up, Dust yourself off, Start all over again."
The movie Swing Time was released in 1936; the Depression was raging and Fred and Ginger were cranking out light entertainment for RKO featuring opulent settings, popular music, lots of dancing and oft times offering a few chuckles at the foibles of the upper crust. In the process they also created a body or work that is unsurpassed in the field of American Musical Movies and indeed Dance on Film.
Pick Yourself Up is introduced first in song as Fred hits on Ginger, a ballroom dance instructor, by pretending he can't dance, a bit later its used in a classic dance sequence as Fred tries to save Ginger's job by showing her boss that she has indeed taught him to dance (much to Ginger's surprise.)
Will Barack and Michele have a number up their sleeves ala Fred and Ginger for the Inauguration Ball this eve? We will have to wait and see, but in the meantime enjoy this clip; it just doesn't get any better than this!
Saturday, January 17, 2009
Obama to Militarize NASA
NASA chief Griffin says goodbye to employees- msnbc.com
NASA Administrator Michael Griffin said goodbye Friday to the space agency's employees, thanking them for their hard work during his four years on the job and urging them to support his successor.
Griffin spoke to employees around the country in a live televised address from NASA headquarters in Washington. He became NASA's 11th administrator in 2005, two years after the Columbia disaster and right as space shuttles were gearing up to return to flight.
He was appointed by President George W. Bush, and like other agency heads, offered his letter of resignation as the federal government changes hands. Griffin said in recent months that he would be willing to stay on, but, in the end, was not asked.
Story continues below ↓advertisement | your ad here
The incoming Obama administration has not yet named a replacement, but is floating the name of retired Air Force Gen. J. Scott Gration, who has almost no space experience but was a military adviser to the president-elect during the campaign.
His lack of space experience has raised some concerns with Senate Space Subcommittee Chairman Bill Nelson, D-Fla.
Griffin, by contrast, holds a doctorate in aerospace engineer with multiple other degrees. He worked earlier in his career at NASA and was serving as space department head at Johns Hopkins University's applied physics lab in Laurel, Md., when asked to take over NASA.
NASA Administrator Michael Griffin said goodbye Friday to the space agency's employees, thanking them for their hard work during his four years on the job and urging them to support his successor.
Griffin spoke to employees around the country in a live televised address from NASA headquarters in Washington. He became NASA's 11th administrator in 2005, two years after the Columbia disaster and right as space shuttles were gearing up to return to flight.
He was appointed by President George W. Bush, and like other agency heads, offered his letter of resignation as the federal government changes hands. Griffin said in recent months that he would be willing to stay on, but, in the end, was not asked.
Story continues below ↓advertisement | your ad here
The incoming Obama administration has not yet named a replacement, but is floating the name of retired Air Force Gen. J. Scott Gration, who has almost no space experience but was a military adviser to the president-elect during the campaign.
His lack of space experience has raised some concerns with Senate Space Subcommittee Chairman Bill Nelson, D-Fla.
Griffin, by contrast, holds a doctorate in aerospace engineer with multiple other degrees. He worked earlier in his career at NASA and was serving as space department head at Johns Hopkins University's applied physics lab in Laurel, Md., when asked to take over NASA.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Hero! Chesley Sullenburger
'Miracle on the Hudson': All safe in jet crash:
'He is the consummate pilot,' his wife, Lorrie Sullenberger, told the New York Post.
Sullenberger is an U.S. Air Force Academy grad who flew F-4 fighter planes while in the Air Force, she said. 'He is about performing that airplane to the exact precision to which it is made.'
Sullenberger is an airline safety expert who has consulted with NASA and others, according to his resume posted on the Internet. He has 40 years of experience, 29 with US Airways, and hold masters' degrees in public administration and industrial psychology."
'He is the consummate pilot,' his wife, Lorrie Sullenberger, told the New York Post.
Sullenberger is an U.S. Air Force Academy grad who flew F-4 fighter planes while in the Air Force, she said. 'He is about performing that airplane to the exact precision to which it is made.'Sullenberger is an airline safety expert who has consulted with NASA and others, according to his resume posted on the Internet. He has 40 years of experience, 29 with US Airways, and hold masters' degrees in public administration and industrial psychology."
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Why Did The US Leak Israeli War Plans?
In a three-pager today the New York Times has co-operated in the leaking of a shocking amount of information about the alleged Iranian nuclear weapons program and Israeli/US reactions to it.
Why do I say "co-operated"? The Times goes out of its way to make that co-operation clear when they state, "Several details of the covert effort have been omitted from this account, at the request of senior United States intelligence and administration officials, to avoid harming continuing operations." Clearly that implies that any information leaked in the article was approved by the administration.
This raises several interesting questions;
(ONE) Why was the information leaked NOW?
(TWO) Was the leak approved by the Obama team?
In an attempt to consider these questions lets look at the major points of the leak.
(Leak 1) Last year Israel requested bunker busting bombs and permission (from the United States) to fly over Iraq. Bush hemmed and hawed on the bombs (but allegedly hasn't delivered) and allegedly gave an emphatic NO to the flyover. Instead he supposedly told the Israelis of new covert actions the US was undertaking against Iranian nuclear enrichment specifically and against Iranian infrastructure generically.
What are the possible reasons for leaking this information?
(A) It may make GWB appear to be more level-headed then most would believe as he prepares to leave his reign to the judgments of history.
(B) In light of recent action in Gaza what does releasing supposed plans by Israel to attack Iranian nuclear sites say to AIPAC, Israel and its Arab foes? There are multiple possibilities here.
(b1) Making public an American slap-down of these Israeli requests may be an attempt to show an administration slightly more neutral in the ongoing conflict than is generally assumed. If so this would upset AIPAC and current Israeli leadership and might also be an attempt to influence the upcoming Israeli elections. A side benefit would be the making public of American "respect" for the sovereignty of Iraq; the US had only very questionable authority (if any) to allow a flyover.
(b2) If one assumes reasonable persons control Iran (and that assumption is, in my opinion a valid one), then the exposure of serious Israeli intentions to attack Iran's nuclear facilities could be expected to have a cautionary effect on Iranian leadership.
Note some delicacy here in that (b1) and (b2) are not all mutually exclusive; these possible goals could be targeted with the same leaked information; making the US appear more even-handed regarding Gaza, showing respect for Iraqi sovereignty, and providing a cautionary tale to Iranian leadership.
The wild card here is the potential effect upon domestic Israeli politics. The actions taken in Gaza are being given less support by the Israeli population than similar previous actions. What effect does the image of an Israeli government stopped from bombing Iran only by US actions have on the internal Israeli political situation? One could make equally solid arguments that it benefits either hawks or doves, certainly it complicates those upcoming elections. Perhaps this will be clarified by future Israeli reactions to these leaks, but the leak was given without any certainty as to their effects in this regard. In that sense the leak was a bold action. In its lack of concern for Israeli political players it may also signal a move away from past knee-jerk support for AIPAC and Likudniks towards a more neutral stance. Dick Cheney this was not!
It appears to me that (Leak 1) smacks of both subtlety and boldness in the use of intelligence that has NOT been a trait of the administration over the last 8 years. On (Leak 1) it appears to me that it likely was approved by, and probably conceived by, the Obama team and indicates a far more delicate use of intel, media, and popular opinion than we have seen in the past. If it was conceived by the Obama team the obvious benefit to GWB's reputation can only be considered a brilliant stroke.
(Leak 2) The leak indicates that Bush was briefed on contingency plans to bomb Iranian facilities but he never instructed the military to move beyond the contingency stage. It gives credit to SecDef Gates for convincing Bush that an overt attack on Iranian nuclear facilities would be "ineffective, lead to the expulsion of international inspectors and drive Iran’s nuclear effort further out of view."
What are the possible reasons for (Leak 2)?
(2a) It counters the wide spread rumors that Bush had ordered the military beyond contingency planning for overt attacks on Iranian soil, and thus it again makes GWB appear a bit more reasonable than commonly seen.
(2b) It makes Gates, who Obama has picked to remain as SecDef, look particularly reasonable and intelligent.
Perhaps there is a pattern here. If Obama wants to lend support for his choice at SecDef its not unwise to do so in such a way as to make GWB look a bit better as well. Additionally Obama can be seen here to have made a wise decision regarding Gates; that he was not simply chosen for bipartisanship but for a calm steady hand at SecDef.
(Leak 3) "Several years ago, foreign intelligence services tinkered with individual power units that Iran bought in Turkey to drive its centrifuges" ... "An engineer in Switzerland, who worked with the Pakistani nuclear black-marketeer Abdul Qadeer Khan, had been “turned” by American intelligence officials and helped them slip faulty technology into parts bought by the Iranians." .... "A number of centrifuges blew up, prompting public declarations of sabotage by Iranian officials." There is also much non-specific talk about high tech experimental covert methodology to attack Iranian infrastructure.
(3a) One can only assume that the "engineer in Switzerland" was already burned before this was leaked and that Iran already knew exactly how and by whom those centrifuges were sabotaged. This seems to be a leak of no real significance, probably used to pad the release, and, via the use of unimportant detail, to hide the real intended uses of the article; Leaks ONE and TWO.
(3b) Talk of super secret high tech abilities perhaps increases paranoia in the Iranian command and control structures and, perhaps, provides some domestic strokes to the US intel community.
(Leak 4) "The United States did give Israel one item on its shopping list: high-powered radar, called the X-Band, to detect any Iranian missile launchings."
(4a) Again one must assume that this information is already well known to Israels foes. After all this entire article was reviewed by "senior United States intelligence and administration officials", and information was omitted "to avoid harming continuing operations. " This also appears to be essentially useless detail lending a sense of authenticity to the entire leak.
I think the article is the work of Obama's team, perhaps driven by Gates, and it indicates that Gates (a former head of the CIA) has found a leader who is interested in using intelligence as a force in and of itself instead of simply using it to build a domestic drum beat for military action. That conclusion, which might be altered by future events, is the most optimistic I have been in ages.
Why do I say "co-operated"? The Times goes out of its way to make that co-operation clear when they state, "Several details of the covert effort have been omitted from this account, at the request of senior United States intelligence and administration officials, to avoid harming continuing operations." Clearly that implies that any information leaked in the article was approved by the administration.
This raises several interesting questions;
(ONE) Why was the information leaked NOW?
(TWO) Was the leak approved by the Obama team?
In an attempt to consider these questions lets look at the major points of the leak.
(Leak 1) Last year Israel requested bunker busting bombs and permission (from the United States) to fly over Iraq. Bush hemmed and hawed on the bombs (but allegedly hasn't delivered) and allegedly gave an emphatic NO to the flyover. Instead he supposedly told the Israelis of new covert actions the US was undertaking against Iranian nuclear enrichment specifically and against Iranian infrastructure generically.
What are the possible reasons for leaking this information?
(A) It may make GWB appear to be more level-headed then most would believe as he prepares to leave his reign to the judgments of history.
(B) In light of recent action in Gaza what does releasing supposed plans by Israel to attack Iranian nuclear sites say to AIPAC, Israel and its Arab foes? There are multiple possibilities here.
(b1) Making public an American slap-down of these Israeli requests may be an attempt to show an administration slightly more neutral in the ongoing conflict than is generally assumed. If so this would upset AIPAC and current Israeli leadership and might also be an attempt to influence the upcoming Israeli elections. A side benefit would be the making public of American "respect" for the sovereignty of Iraq; the US had only very questionable authority (if any) to allow a flyover.
(b2) If one assumes reasonable persons control Iran (and that assumption is, in my opinion a valid one), then the exposure of serious Israeli intentions to attack Iran's nuclear facilities could be expected to have a cautionary effect on Iranian leadership.
Note some delicacy here in that (b1) and (b2) are not all mutually exclusive; these possible goals could be targeted with the same leaked information; making the US appear more even-handed regarding Gaza, showing respect for Iraqi sovereignty, and providing a cautionary tale to Iranian leadership.
The wild card here is the potential effect upon domestic Israeli politics. The actions taken in Gaza are being given less support by the Israeli population than similar previous actions. What effect does the image of an Israeli government stopped from bombing Iran only by US actions have on the internal Israeli political situation? One could make equally solid arguments that it benefits either hawks or doves, certainly it complicates those upcoming elections. Perhaps this will be clarified by future Israeli reactions to these leaks, but the leak was given without any certainty as to their effects in this regard. In that sense the leak was a bold action. In its lack of concern for Israeli political players it may also signal a move away from past knee-jerk support for AIPAC and Likudniks towards a more neutral stance. Dick Cheney this was not!
It appears to me that (Leak 1) smacks of both subtlety and boldness in the use of intelligence that has NOT been a trait of the administration over the last 8 years. On (Leak 1) it appears to me that it likely was approved by, and probably conceived by, the Obama team and indicates a far more delicate use of intel, media, and popular opinion than we have seen in the past. If it was conceived by the Obama team the obvious benefit to GWB's reputation can only be considered a brilliant stroke.
(Leak 2) The leak indicates that Bush was briefed on contingency plans to bomb Iranian facilities but he never instructed the military to move beyond the contingency stage. It gives credit to SecDef Gates for convincing Bush that an overt attack on Iranian nuclear facilities would be "ineffective, lead to the expulsion of international inspectors and drive Iran’s nuclear effort further out of view."
What are the possible reasons for (Leak 2)?
(2a) It counters the wide spread rumors that Bush had ordered the military beyond contingency planning for overt attacks on Iranian soil, and thus it again makes GWB appear a bit more reasonable than commonly seen.
(2b) It makes Gates, who Obama has picked to remain as SecDef, look particularly reasonable and intelligent.
Perhaps there is a pattern here. If Obama wants to lend support for his choice at SecDef its not unwise to do so in such a way as to make GWB look a bit better as well. Additionally Obama can be seen here to have made a wise decision regarding Gates; that he was not simply chosen for bipartisanship but for a calm steady hand at SecDef.
(Leak 3) "Several years ago, foreign intelligence services tinkered with individual power units that Iran bought in Turkey to drive its centrifuges" ... "An engineer in Switzerland, who worked with the Pakistani nuclear black-marketeer Abdul Qadeer Khan, had been “turned” by American intelligence officials and helped them slip faulty technology into parts bought by the Iranians." .... "A number of centrifuges blew up, prompting public declarations of sabotage by Iranian officials." There is also much non-specific talk about high tech experimental covert methodology to attack Iranian infrastructure.
(3a) One can only assume that the "engineer in Switzerland" was already burned before this was leaked and that Iran already knew exactly how and by whom those centrifuges were sabotaged. This seems to be a leak of no real significance, probably used to pad the release, and, via the use of unimportant detail, to hide the real intended uses of the article; Leaks ONE and TWO.
(3b) Talk of super secret high tech abilities perhaps increases paranoia in the Iranian command and control structures and, perhaps, provides some domestic strokes to the US intel community.
(Leak 4) "The United States did give Israel one item on its shopping list: high-powered radar, called the X-Band, to detect any Iranian missile launchings."
(4a) Again one must assume that this information is already well known to Israels foes. After all this entire article was reviewed by "senior United States intelligence and administration officials", and information was omitted "to avoid harming continuing operations. " This also appears to be essentially useless detail lending a sense of authenticity to the entire leak.
I think the article is the work of Obama's team, perhaps driven by Gates, and it indicates that Gates (a former head of the CIA) has found a leader who is interested in using intelligence as a force in and of itself instead of simply using it to build a domestic drum beat for military action. That conclusion, which might be altered by future events, is the most optimistic I have been in ages.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
