Why is gold rocketing again? Is it fears over inflation or fears over the collapse of fiat currencies?
We have no idea, but it’s definitely shaking.
Here’s a one-year chart;
Now let’s zoom in:
And here’s a slightly less readable, but understandable chart of gold priced in euros, which of course, is at new highs:
Join the conversation about this story »
C Street House Used Interns As Servants, Author Tells Rachel Maddow (VIDEO)
The C Street house is a $1.8 million Washington D.C. residence occupied by Congressional members of a religious organization known as The Family. After being…
Amnesty International: Hurricane Katrina Victims Had Human Rights Violated
NEW ORLEANS — Amnesty International says the U.S. government and Gulf Coast states have consistently violated the human rights of hurricane victims since Hurricane Katrina…
Republican Leadership Conference 2010: No Mention Of Hurricane Katrina As GOP Meets In New Orleans
Five years after President Bush’s failed response to a natural disaster in New Orleans deeply damaged his party’s credibility and helped sweep them from power,…
U.S.-Russia Nuclear Treaty: Republicans Expected To Support Obama Deal
WASHINGTON — Despite near gridlock in the Senate, Republicans were expected to swing behind a new arms control treaty with Russia that President Barack Obama…
Rove rehashes tired claim that health care bill “only appears to be affordable on paper”
In his Wall Street Journal column, Karl Rove advanced the claim that the health care legislation “only appears to be affordable on paper because it includes 10 years worth of revenue from huge tax increases and gigantic Medicare cuts to pay for six years of spending.” But, in fact, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that the Senate bill — which the House passed — will not only reduce budget deficits through 2019 but will continue to reduce deficits in the following decade.
From Rove’s April 8 Wall Street Journal column:
The administration’s difficulties in defending the stimulus may be why the president challenged Republicans who want to repeal, replace and reform ObamaCare to “go for it.” Mr. Obama seems to be wagering that Democrats will be better off in the midterm elections talking about health care than the economy. That, at least, has a chance of exciting the party’s left-wing base. Focusing on the economy will likely depress turnout among independents and centrist Democrats.
But by big margins Obama-Care is unpopular and Americans distrust the administration’s claims that its new entitlement program is affordable and “won’t add a dime to the deficit,” as Mr. Obama relentlessly repeated during its passage through Congress.
It won’t only add a single dime to the deficit; it will add zillions of them. ObamaCare only appears to be affordable on paper because it includes 10 years worth of revenue from huge tax increases and gigantic Medicare cuts to pay for six years of spending. What’s more, 82% of the $434 billion expansion of Medicaid and 84% of the $466 billion in subsidies for insurance companies are spent between 2016 and 2019, after Mr. Obama would leave office (even if he serves a second term).
CBO: Health care legislation yields “a net reduction in federal deficits of $143 billion” over 10 years. On March 20, CBO released an estimate of the effect of the combined effect of the Senate bill and reconciliation proposal on the federal budget. It found:
CBO and JCT estimate that enacting both pieces of legislation — H.R. 3590 and the reconciliation proposal — would produce a net reduction in federal deficits of $143 billion over the 2010-2019 period as result of changes in direct spending and revenues.
CBO: Over second 10 years, reconciliation bill would save “around one-half percent of GDP.” CBO also estimated savings for the decade following the 2010-2019 period:
Therefore, CBO has developed a rough outlook for the decade following the 2010-2019 period by grouping the elements of the legislation into broad categories and (together with JCT) assessing the rate at which the budgetary impact of each of those broad categories is likely to increase over time.
[…]
Using this analytic approach, CBO estimated that enacting H.R. 3590, as passed by the Senate, would reduce federal budget deficits over the ensuing decade relative to those projected under current law — with a total effect during that decade in a broad range between onequarter percent and one-half percent of gross domestic product (GDP).
[…]
Reflecting the changes made by the reconciliation proposal, the combined effect of enacting H.R. 3590 and the reconciliation proposal would also be to reduce federal budget deficits over the ensuing decade relative to those projected under current law — with a total effect during that decade in a broad range around one-half percent of GDP. The incremental effect of enacting the reconciliation bill (over and above the effect of enacting H.R. 3590 by itself) would thus be to further reduce federal budget deficits in that decade, with an effect in a broad range between zero and one-quarter percent of GDP.
Krugman: Claim that the bill “front-loads revenues and backloads spending” is a “lie” In a March 27 New York Times blog post, Paul Krugman responded to former CBO director Douglas Holtz-Eakin’s claim that health care reform legislation is filled with “gimmicks” designed to make the legislation appear to reduce the deficit. Krugman wrote:
OK, I finally got around to reading Douglas Holtz-Eakin’s op-ed on health care reform. It’s much worse than I thought; time to scratch Holtz-Eakin off my shrinking list of reasonable, reasonably honest conservatives.
How bad is it? Holtz-Eakin declares that
Gimmick No. 1 is the way the bill front-loads revenues and backloads spending. That is, the taxes and fees it calls for are set to begin immediately, but its new subsidies would be deferred so that the first 10 years of revenue would be used to pay for only 6 years of spending.
I think that’s what is technically known as a “lie”. Holtz-Eakin, of all people, knows how to read a CBO report. So he’s perfectly capable of looking at the actual report (pdf) and seeing that the revenues, like the costs, are minimal for the first four years. Here’s the chart:
[…]
His implication that there’s funny business going on is totally false, and he knows it.
Wait, it gets worse: Holtz-Eakin implies that there are hidden, delayed costs:
Consider, too, the fate of the $70 billion in premiums expected to be raised in the first 10 years for the legislation’s new long-term health care insurance program. This money is counted as deficit reduction, but the benefits it is intended to finance are assumed not to materialize in the first 10 years, so they appear nowhere in the cost of the legislation.
Claims that the plan is window-dressed to look good in its first decade only to go sour later might sound plausible — except for the fact that the CBO projects bigger deficit-reduction in the second decade of the reform than in the first decade, something that wouldn’t happen if lots of costs were being hidden by being pushed off into the future.
That said, we do learn something important from Holtz-Eakin’s article. If this is the best critique a conservative budget wonk can come up with — if deliberately misrepresenting how the legislation works is the only way to make it seem irresponsible — then the bill must be pretty sound in fiscal terms.
New Orleans Cop Explains How Police Gunned Down Unarmed Civilians In Post-Katrina Incident
A former New Orleans police officer has given authorities a shocking account of the killing by police of two unarmed civilians and the wounding of four others on Danziger Bridge in post-Katrina New Orleans.
The GOP’s Young Eagles: ‘If You’ve Got a Little Insecurity Complex, But You’ve Got Money — What A Cool Group To Hang Out With’
A look inside the high-rolling style of the GOP’s Young Eagles.
I filled out my census and mailed it back the same day I received it. Mine had only questions about those living in my house and nothing about flushing toilets, etc. Though giving any information at all to this government does give me pause, asking who lives in my house is indeed Constitutional.
The amount of money that has been spent on this particular census disgusts me. I personally received a letter alerting me to the fact that the census would be arriving soon, then a day later I received the census, and then I got not one but two letters letting me know I had indeed received the census.
This colossal waste is part of the reason I am about to urge my fellow Conservatives/Libertarians to send yours back too. If you don’t they’ll send a census worker to your house SIX TIMES. And if after the six times they can’t get you, they’ll send someone out to ask your neighbor. And all this at $18 an hour.
“…The bureau is spending $133 million between January and May — or, more than $13 million for each of 10 questions, one of which reads: What is your telephone number? — to publicize the national head-count. Part of that effort is the Super Bowl ad, which Kendall Johnson, a spokeswoman for the bureau, confirmed Wednesday to FoxNews.com cost $2.5 million to air. The ad, produced by actor and director Christopher Guest, also will appear in other media, Johnson said…” (source)
And then there’s the second concern:
“Some Republicans are worried that an anti-government surge among conservatives will lead to lower participation in the U.S. census, which they fear could reduce the number of Republican seats in Congress and state legislatures.” (source)
I’ve definitely never thought of using the Nordby TV bench as a towel holder. But Susanne sure did.
She says, “It did not involve much ‘hacking’: just turned upside down and hung with two solid brackets on the wall.”
If you read German, she writes about her TV unit turned towel holder here. Click here for a google translation to English.
Spitzer’s Roadmap to Redemption
Former New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s (D) “swift return to the bully pulpit may say as much about us — a scandal-fatigued public’s diminishing expectations of its officials — as it does about Mr. Spitzer’s restless inability to stay gone. And though he professes not to have a specific strategy of image rehabilitation in mind, whatever he is doing may be working,” the New York Times reports.
CBS News analyst Jeff Greenfield notes what distinguishes the former governor’s scandal from the more recent ones, like those of John Edwards, is that Spitzer “took swift responsibility and did penance.”
Said Greenfield: “This was legitimately a private failure. A serious one, that made him no longer able to be governor. If he were trying to talk about moral rearmament, it would be appropriate to say, ‘Hold it.’ But he is talking about how to prevent another financial meltdown, and he’s in a pretty interesting position to talk about that.”
Will Mahoney Make a Comeback?
The Fort Pierce Tribune says former Rep. Tim Mahoney (D-FL) may challenge Rep. Tom Rooney (R-FL), the man who sent him back to the private sector in 2008 after Mahoney admitted to “numerous” affairs several weeks before the election.
Said Mahoney: “Maybe it’s me, maybe it’s not, I don’t know, but the district deserves a race, that I know for sure.”
The Hotline: “Rooney likely owes his seat to Mahoney’s late implosion in ‘08. In the weeks before the scandal broke, a GOP poll showed Rooney trailing Mahoney by the high single digits, and the GOPer’s fundraising was lagging. But as the salacious details of Mahoney’s affairs were uncovered, Rooney opened a huge lead, and won an easy 60-40% victory.”
Why the Pope Should Take Responsibility and Meet with Victims of Pedophile Priests
Instead of resigning, the Pope should clear his calendar for the next six months and meet with the countless victims of sexual abuse who had their childhoods stolen.
Instead of resigning, the Pope should clear his calendar for the next six months and meet with the countless victims of sexual abuse who had their childhoods stolen.
Weekly Diaspora: Busting Immigration Myths
Feature by The Media Consortium’s Immigration Blogger, with links to the week’s best independent, progressive reporting about immigration.
Feature by The Media Consortium's Immigration Blogger, with links to the week's best independent, progressive reporting about immigration.
Your Guide to National Nuke Policy History Month
Busy times indeed for US nuclear weapons policy makers. The administration today released the first Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) in eight years (and the first ever to be published as an unclassified document). On Thursday, President Obama and Russian President…
United States – Nuclear weapon – North Korea – Warfare and Conflict – New START
Making The One State Solution Inevitable
Other than screaming by the right, there does not seem to be any significant aftermath to President Obama’s decision to oppose Israeli settlement expansion. The Israeli government is simply ignoring Obama’s demand to stop building in the Arab neighborhoods in…
Barack Obama – Israel – Israeli government – Israeli settlement – United States
Romney Says Massachusetts Not A Model For Health Reform, After Urging Dems To Use It As Model
Mitt Romney continues to struggle with questions about why he wants to repeal a health care law that is so similar to the health reforms he signed in 2006 as Governor of Massachusetts, particularly since he used to argue that RomneyCare should serve as a template for national reform. In October of 2009, Romney urged […]
Mitt Romney continues to struggle with questions about why he wants to repeal a health care law that is so similar to the health reforms he signed in 2006 as Governor of Massachusetts, particularly since he used to argue that RomneyCare should serve as a template for national reform.
In October of 2009, Romney urged Democrats to use the Massachusetts law as a model to expand coverage. “We have found that we can get everybody insured without breaking the bank and without a public option,” Romney told CNN’s Sanjay Gupta. “Massachusetts is a model for getting everybody insured in a way that doesn’t break the bank, doesn’t put the government in the driver’s seat and allows people to own their own insurance policies and not to have to worry about losing coverage. That’s what Massachusetts did,” he said.
But since federal reformers adopted Massachusetts’ individual mandate and standard benefit provisions (among many others), Romney has found himself in the awkward position of having to defend his biggest legislative accomplishment while simultaneously attacking its federal twin. Yesterday, during a book signing in New Hampshire, Romney said that Massachusetts is not a model for coverage expansion:
“Had they brought the federal bill to my desk when I was governor, I’d have vetoed it,” Romney told an audience of 150 yesterday at the New Hampshire Institute of Politics at St. Anselm College in Manchester…”We solved a problem in the state with a state answer,” Romney said. “We didn’t have the federal government come in and intrude on the rights of states.”…Romney said the federal government created its plan without learning from Massachusetts or any other state. “It shouldn’t have been put in place without experimentation,” Romney said.
Incidentally, Romney used the 2009 interview (at that point, he was too focused on criticizing the public option to worry about other arguments) to berate Democrats for not using Massachusetts as a model. They did, and now he’s pretending that they didn’t.
Cross-posted on The Wonk Room.
A high-level Arab source tells Fox News that Arab countries had no intention of raising Israel’s undisclosed nuclear program at next week’s Nuclear Security Summit in Washington.
The diplomat, who is involved in the conference asked not to be named, said this was a way for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to dodge President Obama and avoid committing to peace talks.
Sources close to the prime minister tell Fox that Netanyahu had “every intention” of attending, but when he realized some Arab countries planned on “bashing” Israel into signing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty–which would mean Israel’s undisclosed nuclear program would be monitored–Israel decided to pull out the prime minister.
Israeli officials won’t disclose where they got the information that Arab leaders plan to raise the issue. They announced they will instead send Deputy Prime Minister and Intelligence Affairs Minister Dan Meridor to represent Israel.
The Arab source says next week’s summit is not the proper venue in which to raise such a matter.
A better venue might be in May at a United Nations conference in New York where the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty will be reviewed, the source said.
It is believed that Israel has at least 200 nuclear warheads, according to independent experts.
Next week’s Nuclear Security Summit was supposed to also give Netanyahu a chance to rally other countries behind sanctions against Iran’s nuclear program.
President Obama’s 47 country nuclear security conference begins on Monday.
China has over 95% market share in the global production of rare earths, but many alternatives are now being examined, such as the Wigu Hill deposit in Tanzania owned by Montero Mining.
Apparently Wigu Hill has a lot going for it, both geologically and geographically. Geologically because the deposit is carbonatite in form with no associated radioactive materials present such as uranium or thorium that while potentially adding a revenue stream also greatly complicate the handling, concentrating and refining processes. Concentration is another facet of the geological advantages in Wigu’s favor, in places concentration goes as high as 25%, but is likely to average 7% to 10% according to the article. The other advantage is Tanzania’s geographic proximity to world class mining, processing and refining expertise in neighboring South Africa.
Opportunities like this in Tanzania should be a reminder that there are actually rare earth deposits all over the world. Actually, production in places like North America was shut down in the past due to environmental concerns plus cost competitiveness from China. South Africa and India used to be the world’s leading producers.
Now that rare earths demand is surging due to their use in battery technology, old production areas can be re-started and new ones can be discovered.
Wagu is of even higher grade than China’s huge Bayan Obo mine that produces most of the world’s supply:
While China might have a monopoly in the near-term, since it takes time to re-start old rare earth mining activities in other places, in the long-term there is actually no shortage of ‘rare earths’.
Join the conversation about this story »
Japanese people have special tools…… The tools in question are genes that can break down some of the complex carbohydrate molecules in seaweed … They are wielded by the hordes of bacteria lurking in the guts of every Japanese person … Some gut bacteria have borrowed the seaweed-digesting genes from other microbes living in the coastal oceans….… Within each of our bowels live around a hundred trillion microbes, whose cells outnumber our own by ten to one. This ‘gut microbiome’ act like an extra organ, helping us to digest molecules in our food that we couldn’t break down ourselves. These include the large carbohydrate molecules found in the plants we eat. But marine algae – seaweeds – contain special sulphur-rich carbohydrates that aren’t found on land. Breaking these down is a tough challenge for our partners-in-digestion. The genes and enzymes that they normally use aren’t up to the task.Fortunately, bacteria aren’t just limited to the genes that they inherit from their ancestors. They can swap genes between individuals as easily as we humans trade money or gifts. This ‘horizontal gene transfer’ means that bacteria have an entire kingdom of genes, ripe for the borrowing. All they need to do is sidle up to the right donor. And in the world’s oceans, one such donor exists – a seagoing bacterium called Zobellia galactanivorans.Zobellia is a seaweed-eater. It lives on, and digests, several species including those used to make nori. Nori is an extremely common ingredient in Japanese cuisine, used to garnish dishes and wrap sushi. And when hungry diners wolfed down morsels of these algae, some of them also swallowed marine bacteria. Suddenly, this exotic species was thrust among our own gut residents. As the unlikely partners mingled, they traded genes, including those that allow them to break down the carbohydrates of their marine meals. The gut bacteria suddenly gained the ability to exploit an extra source of energy and those that retained their genetic loans prospered……. [the human gut bacteria] B.plebeius seems to have a habit of scrounging genes from marine bacteria. Its genome is rife with genes that are more closely related to their counterparts in marine species like Zobellia than to those in other gut microbes. All of these borrowed genes do the same thing – they break down the complex carbohydrates of marine algae…… To see whether this was a common event, Hehemann screened the gut bacteria of 13 Japanese volunteers for signs of porphyranases. These “gut metagenomes” yielded at least seven potential enzymes that fitted the bill, along with six others from another group with a similar role. On the other hand, Hehemann couldn’t find a single such gene among 18 North Americans….… People might only gain the genes after eating lots and lots of sushi but Hehemann has some evidence that they could be passed down from parent to child. One of the people he studied was an unweaned baby girl, who had clearly never eaten a mouthful of sushi in her life. And yet, her gut bacteria had a porphyranase gene, just as her mother’s did.… “Today, sushi is prepared with roasted nori and the chance of making contact with marine bacteria is low,” she said. The project’s other leader, Gurvan Michel, concurs. He notes that of all the gut bacteria from the Japanese volunteers, only B.plebeius as acquired the porphyranase enzymes. “This horizontal gene transfer remains a rare event,” he says….… Rob Knight, a microbiome researcher from the University of Colorado… “This result reinforces the need to conduct a broad and culturally diverse survey of who harbours what microbes. The key to understanding obesity or IBD might well be in genes or microbes acquired under circumstances very different to those we experience in Western society.”
Because Nori is now cooked, and because persistence seems fragile, the genes will probably disappear from Japanese gut bacteria. It’s a fascinating example, however, of the power of the microbiome. The therapeutic implications are obvious. Science fiction writers, incidentally, have long described the use of tailored gut bacteria to enable novel diets. When we run out of beef, cooked grass might be yummy.
—
My Google Reader Shared items (feed)
WebKit is arguably one of the most important browser-related projects at the moment. Used by Apple Safari, Google Chrome and Chromium, the Android, WebOS and Symbian OS web browsers, it’s safe to say that the open-source web rendering engine powers quite a big chunk of the web content consumed each day by people all over the world. The project is… (read more)
The end of the week is here and time for another look back at the happenings in Mobile Tech Manor. This was the first week with the iPad in hand, literally, and many hours were spent touching and swiping on the screen. I looked at many apps for the iPad, and came to appreciate some old favorites.
It has been an amusing week, watching those on the web trade barbs over the iPad. It seems that the iPad evokes either a strong favorable opinion or a fiery dislike from everyone, with nothing in between. I can confidently state that those with the dislike are by and large in the group that has not used the iPad, which is telling in and of itself.
I have enjoyed using the iPad in a number of ways as I feel out the best ways to use it. What I’ve come to realize is there is no best way; the beauty of the iPad is that it can be used in various locations, in a number of ways. The truth is it feels right no matter how I use it — in portrait orientation like a book, in landscape while holding it, on a table using the case to prop it up. I find I gravitate to whatever arrangement feels right, and I don’t have to give it a lot of thought. I simply pick it up and use it.
The iPad is not a notebook/ netbook replacement, which many are happy to point out. It’s not a replacement for anything, really. What it is is a whole new way of working with information, either on the web or in documents. It is like a little window into that information, as the iPad is totally out of the way while accessing it. It’s the tool that gets totally out of the way while being used, and that is very liberating.
It is obvious that a notebook is better for some things, but the iPad is much better at many, if that’s what you have with you at the time. It’s easy to carry with you and it’s very easy to use. That’s a powerful combination, and why the iPad is a good tool.
I am writing this column on the iPad, sitting in my easy chair while watching TV with my family. I have the iPad in landscape orientation, propped up in the Apple case at a comfortable typing angle. The onscreen keyboard is comfortable to use in this configuration, and I am going to town writing this.
I did not set out to force myself to write this on the iPad. I realized sitting here that I could knock this column out, so I picked up the iPad and got to work. If writing it on the virtual keyboard had been too much trouble I would have stopped right away. I am not one to force myself to write a long column on a device that is frustrating me. If it feels good, do it.
I wrote this in the WordPress app which works well. There is no WYSIWYG editor, so you have to use the HTML editor in the app. I only wrote it as a draft so I didn’t have to get into any HTML, which is good as those days are behind me. I saved it as a draft to the blog and then finalized it on the Mac. It worked very well, better than I thought it would.
I have gotten pretty fast at typing on this keyboard. It’s not perfect, but it works better at longer pieces than I thought it would. Making short entries such as responding to email is simple, and I do a lot of that in both portrait and landscape orientations. Longer entries I would normally not undertake, but this is working out quite well.
There are some things I wish worked differently on the iPad, but for the most part I like it. It is a natural way to do most things.
I am quite pleased with the SugarSync app on the iPad, and how all of my files are available without taking up a lot of the limited space on the device. I can work with Word, Excel and PowerPoint docs using the iWork apps. I am finding that this method turns the iPad into a production tool with good value.
We use Google Docs at GigaOM, and I read Kevin’s method for working with them on the iPad with great interest. I think what he uncovered is fantastic, but I heard about a free app that I am really finding useful. Memeo Connect is only a viewer of Google Docs, but that’s what I usually do with my docs remotely.
The interface of Memeo Connect is an attractive folder scheme. The doc viewer is outstanding, with all types of documents (DOC, XLS, PPT, PDF, images, video) displaying perfectly. Memeo syncs docs with the iPad so important ones are always available, even without a web connection. I highly recommend this app for Google Docs users.
e-Books of the week
I am reading on the iPad a lot, and this week I continued the saga of an altered WWII reality with Harry Turtledove’s great series. In Upsetting the Balance the Big Uglies (humans) finally begin hitting back at the aliens that invaded during WWII. I enjoy a good story and I am enjoying this series a lot. I had been reading the series with eReader on the iPhone, but this week I started reading using it on the iPad. It’s not a native iPad app which is a shame, but I find the pixel doubled screen to be fine for reading. The text is not as pretty, but it’s quite pleasant to use.
I also began reading Roadside Crosses by Jefferey Deaver, a great thriller. I picked it up in the iBookstore to give the iPad’s native reader a try. It is a reader as good as Kindle on the iPad. The book is typical Deaver and I recommend it.
Wrap-up
That’s the way my week went down in the home office, Mobile Tech Manor. It was an interesting week as I constantly learned something new about the iPad. This device will be game changing for many, with a design totally dedicated to the mobile experience.
[JURIST] A Thai court on Friday issued arrest warrants for at least 17 high-profile protesters in an attempt to put down violent protests. Among the accused are top leaders of the the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship, also known as red shirts. The warrants are in addition to warrants issued Thursday for seven high-level protesters accused of being among a large group of protesters that entered the Parliament building during protests Wednesday. Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva said he hopes that the arrest of the high-profile leaders will cause other protesters to disperse.
On Wednesday, Vejjajiva declared a state of emergency, giving the government increased ability to detain individuals and censor the media. The declaration came just days after a Thai court dismissed the government’s application for an injunction against protesters gathered in Bangkok’s business district. The injunction would have ordered protest organizers to lead the group out of the area and would have banned rallies in 11 other areas. The court denied the request stating that the Internal Security Act, approved by the Thai Cabinet in March, already gave the government eviction powers. The red shirts are supporters of former prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra, who was removed from power in 2006 following a coup. The group is demanding that Abhisit dissolve parliament and call new elections. Last April, Abhisit declared a state of emergency in Bangkok and several provinces following a similar outbreak of protests calling for his resignation.
WASHINGTON–President Obama, in Prague to sign the anti-nuclear START treaty, brushed aside Sarah Palin’s criticism that he was soft-on-nukes during an interview with ABC’s George Stephanopoulos. “Sarah Palin’s not much of an expert on nuclear issues,” Obama said.
On Wednesday on Fox News, Palin compared Obama to a kid in a playground who is asking for a punch in the face.
“It’s unbelievable. Unbelievable,” said Palin told Fox New’s Sean Hannity. “No administration in America’s history would, I think, ever have considered such a step that we just found out President Obama is supporting today. It’s kinda like getting out there on a playground, a bunch of kids, getting ready to fight, and one of the kids saying, ‘Go ahead, punch me in the face and I’m not going to retaliate. Go ahead and do what you want to with me.’”
Here’s the exchange about Palin:
STEPHANOPOULOS: I want to get to some of those broader issues. Because you’re also facing criticism on that. Sarah Palin, taking aim at your decision to restrict the use of nuclear weapons. Your pledge not to strike nations, non-nuclear nations, who abide by the nonproliferation treaty. Here’s what she said. She said, “It’s unbelievable, no other administration would do it.” And then she likened it to kids on the playground. She said you’re like a kid who says, “Punch me in the face, and I’m not going to retaliate.” Your response?
OBAMA: I really have no response. Because last I checked, Sarah Palin’s not much of an expert on nuclear issues.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But the string of criticism has been out there among other Republicans as well. They think you’re restricting use of nuclear weapons too much.
OBAMA: And what I would say to them is that if the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff are comfortable with it, I’m probably going to take my advice from them and not from Sarah Palin.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But not concerned about her criticisms?
OBAMA: No.
Click below for transcript
ranscript: George Stephanopoulos Interviews President Obama
‘Good Morning America’ Anchor Sat Down for Exclusive Interview Following START Treaty Signing
April 9, 2010–
“Good Morning America” anchor George Stephanopoulos interviewed President Barack Obama in Prague, Czech Republic, just after Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev signed the new START treaty.
The following is a transcript of the exclusive interview, which took place on Thursday, April 8, 2010.
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Mr. President, thanks very much for doing this.
OBAMA: Thank you.
STEPHANOPOULOS: So, some tough but successful negotiations with the Russians, now comes the Senate. You sounded pretty confident about ratification, but you know there is this concern about missile defense, and a lot of Republicans believe that even these unilateral Russian statements linking missile defense in the treaty could imperil it.
OBAMA: Well, first thing I think it’s important to remember is that this is a process that wasn’t just run out of the White House. The Pentagon and the Joint Chiefs looked at this every step of the way, our secretary of defense looked at this every step of the way, and the intelligence community looked at it every step of the way. And we were firm, and are now absolutely confident that this in no way impedes our ability to move forward on the missile defense program that’s designed not to target Russia, but in fact, is designed to deal with —
STEPHANOPOULOS: The Russians are saying they’re going to pull out if you proceed.
OBAMA: Well, no, that’s not what they’ve said. What — what they’ve said is that — as we’ve adapted in Europe a phased approach to missile defense, hopefully, we’re going to be able to create a situation where we cooperate with them. But it is going to be contingent and developing, based on our threat assessments. If for example, we are able to create a situation where Iran is no longer posing us a threat in terms of intercontinental ballistic missiles, then it may be that our missile defense configuration is able to be scaled back in a way that doesn’t threaten Russia.
So, all these pieces fit together. We’re looking at a timetable over a five, 10, 15, 20 year time horizon. This treaty itself absolutely accomplishes our initial goal, which was to replace the previous START treaty. To reduce the number of deployed warheads, the number of vehicles, launchers, that are used. But it’s only a start. And we’re going to have to continually build and evolve a whole approach that is designed for the 21st century as opposed to the 20th century. STEPHANOPOULOS: So, you have no doubt you’re going to get the eight Republicans you need to ratify this treaty?
OBAMA: Well, you know, the — listen, I’ve now been in Washington for long enough that, for me to say I have no doubt (LAUGHS) about how the Senate operates would be foolish. I feel confident that leaders like Dick Lugar — who actually was somebody I worked very closely with when I was in the Senate on issues of bomb control — when they have had the opportunity to fully evaluate this treaty, [they] will come to the conclusion that this is in the best interest of the United States. But I will also say to those in the Senate who have questions, is that this is absolutely vital for us to deal with the broader issues of nuclear proliferation, that are probably the number one threat that we face in the future.
STEPHANOPOULOS: I want to get to some of those broader issues. Because you’re also facing criticism on that. Sarah Palin, taking aim at your decision to restrict the use of nuclear weapons. Your pledge not to strike nations, non-nuclear nations, who abide by the nonproliferation treaty. Here’s what she said. She said, “It’s unbelievable, no other administration would do it.” And then she likened it to kids on the playground. She said you’re like a kid who says, “Punch me in the face, and I’m not going to retaliate.” Your response?
OBAMA: I really have no response. Because last I checked, Sarah Palin’s not much of an expert on nuclear issues.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But the string of criticism has been out there among other Republicans as well. They think you’re restricting use of nuclear weapons too much.
OBAMA: And what I would say to them is that if the secretary of defense and the chairman of the Joints Chiefs of Staff are comfortable with it, I’m probably going to take my advice from them and not from Sarah Palin.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But not concerned about her criticisms?
OBAMA: No.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Let’s talk about President Medvedev. I’m going to see him tomorrow. You’ve spoken with him about 14 times negotiating this treaty. And it’s been a struggle. If this was just two lawyers hammering out the details, what did you learn about him?
OBAMA: Well, he — he is a — he’s a very deliberate, very methodical, very honest partner in negotiations, which I find very useful. He’s somebody who says, “Here’s what I can do, here’s what I can’t do.” He, he showed flexibility in negotiations, that, you know, haven’t always been the case in negotiations between the United States and Russia, where essentially you can just trade the talking points and not —
STEPHANOPOULOS: He — really talked?
OBAMA: He actually talked, he actually listened. I think we’ve developed a good working relationship. And I, what he recognizes — and is, I think, one of the central concerns of our whole approach — is that, you know, although the United States and Russia remain by far the largest nuclear superpowers, that the issues of proliferation, the challenges of nuclear terrorism and asymmetric threats, loose nuclear materials, that these are all things that in this environment, probably pose a much greater danger to the safety and security of the American people, or for that matter, the Russian people, than, you know, particular payloads coming from historic adversaries like the United States and the former Soviet Union.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Are you convinced he’s the man in charge in Russia?
OBAMA: You know, I will tell you, he has been able to consistently follow through on the commandments that he’s made. You know, I think there’s no doubt that he takes the counsel of Putin very seriously. I think that there’s no doubt that, you know, Russia is a big, complicated country just like the United States is. And there are all sorts of different voices coming at him at any given time that he’s got to take into account.
But what I’ve been impressed with is, is that from the time that we first met in London, a year ago to today, he has consistently been able to keep the commitments that he’s made, and follow through on them, and — and — the treaty that we signed today is just one example of that.
STEPHANOPOULOS: And it sounds like you may be now on the same page in dealing with Iran.
OBAMA: Uh-huh.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Are you convinced that Russia and President Medvedev take this as seriously and, and feel the same urgency that you do?
OBAMA: I am convinced that what you heard today would’ve been unimaginable a year ago. For me to lay out clearly our approach to sanctions and to have then a Russian president next to me say there’s nothing I heard that I could disagree with, I think it’s an enormous shift and a signal that Russia, like the United States, recognizes that unless we can get all countries to start abiding by certain rules of the road — and right now, our biggest concerns are obviously Iran and North Korea — but they’re a broader set of issues at stake out there. That — that’s going to be damaging to their national security just like ours. And, and so, what you heard today was the Russians I think are clear that we need sanctions that will change the behavior of Iran. And I think that what you’ll be able to see over the next several weeks is, is that both the United States and Russia as part of a broader international effort are going to say to the Iranians once again, you’ve got options here.
STEPHANOPOULOS: An international effort that includes China?
OBAMA: You’ve got options. You can take the path you’re on, and get further isolated with greater and great consequences, or you can actually look at the very reasonable offers that have been out there that would allow them to pursue civilian nuclear energy without pursuing weapons.
Now, you know, you were asking about China. I think China is obviously concerned about their energy. You know, when you have that many people, and you’re growing that fast, then issues of oil are going to be high on your list. But what I’ve been encouraged by in conversations that we’ve had recently with the Chinese is the recognition, as they recognized when it came to North Korea, that if the international community is just standing by toothless and there are no consequences to actors who act contrary to their international obligations — that over time, that’s going to be destabilizing.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But what do you say to critics who say you’re on the same page with Russia now because you’ve given away too much? And that sanctions aren’t going to change Iran’s behavior, unless they include real limits on this trade in oil and refined gasoline products?
OBAMA: You had a compound question here. First, you made a suggestion that we gave away too much, and I — it would be — I’d be curious as to what exactly we gave away.
STEPHANOPOULOS: You’re giving away that — the taking — taking the fine petroleum products off the table.
OBAMA: Oh, I see. So, so, why don’t you reformulate the question here, George, because I’m just trying to follow you here. You’re, you’re suggesting that —
STEPHANOPOULOS: You said you and Russia are on the same page. You’re on the same page, because they’ve taken refined petroleum products off the table. And critics say —
OBAMA: No, no, no, no. I — I didn’t say that.
STEPHANOPOULOS: You don’t believe it. Well —
OBAMA: What — what — what I —
STEPHANOPOULOS: — they said that.
OBAMA: Well, what I said is — is that the United States and Russia both are committed to making sure that there are sanctions that change Iranian behavior. That’s what you heard President Medevdev say, say today. Now, our assessments in terms of what that particular mix is — that hasn’t finalized. That’s still a process of negotiation.
STEPHANOPOULOS: So, it could still include that?
OBAMA: Well, you know, I — I don’t want to negotiate on ABC News. But I think that there are going to be a whole host of measures that we put on the table, that they put on the table, that they think are effective, and that we think are effective, and we’re not doing this in isolation. We’re doing this with the other P-5 Plus One members. So, China is entering in negotiations in New York. We’ve got Germany, and France, and Great Britain. All of us are going to be sitting and crafting, shaping a sanctions regime that we think is actually going to be effective in changing Iranian behavior.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me — let me —
OBAMA: But if the question is, do we have a guarantee as to the sanctions we are able to institute at this stage are automatically going to change Iranian behavior, of course we don’t. I mean, the history of the Iranian regime, like the North Korean regime is that, you know, you apply international pressure on these countries, sometimes they choose to change behavior, sometimes they don’t. Part of that may have to do with their internal political dynamics. But if that pressure is steady, and applied, and consistent, and there’s a unified international effort, over time, you can see changes in behavior. And we saw that in Libya for example, which had pursued —
STEPHANOPOULOS: But so far, three rounds of U.N. sanctions haven’t worked.
OBAMA: Well —
STEPHANOPOULOS: What will be different this time?
OBAMA: Well, the — I don’t think you have seen the degree of international unity that you’ve seen in this effort. Now, we’ve got to explore a whole range of other options. And I’ve been consistent about that. But I think the important point is if that we came in a year and a half ago, close to a year and a half ago, saying that we would approach the Iranian government, give them an option, and we would move on parallel tracks, not because we were naive that the Iranians would automatically accept an open hand from us, but rather because we understood that by taking ourselves off the table as an issue, by showing that we would be willing to engage if, in fact, Iran was willing to act responsibly, what we would be able to do is to mobilize the international community much more effectively than we have in the past. And I think you’re seeing the results of that bear fruit today.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me just press this one more time. Are — are — are you saying now that you’re willing to consider blocking the trade in gasoline to Iran?
OBAMA: George, what I’m saying is I am not going to discuss the specifics of sanctions at this point.
STEPHANOPOULOS: So far, the Iranian officials are calling the sanctions a joke. And I’m sure you’ve seen that. And President Ahmadinejad took after you personally. He — he’s basically calling you a cowboy. The quote — the quote was, “inexperienced amateur,” and he wants you to wait “until your sweat dries and you get some experience.” What do you make of that?
OBAMA: Well, let’s see, George. So far, you’ve quoted Sarah Palin (LAUGHS) —
STEPHANOPOULOS: No, it’s President Ahmadinejad. You have to have deal with him.
OBAMA: — and now President Ahmadinejad. You’re — you’re trying to get a rise out of me.
STEPHANOPOULOS: And it’s not going to work?
OBAMA: No, it’s not. I mean, look, the guy — the guy’s known for saying some pretty, pretty unconstructive stuff, how’s that? And offensive stuff. So, I don’t take that seriously. What I do take seriously is the fact that if we consistent and steady and applying international pressure, that over time, Iran, which is not a stupid regime, which is very attentive in watching what’s happening in the international community, will start making a different set of cost benefit, you know, analyses about whether or not pursuing nuclear weapons makes sense for them.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Whose mind do you have to change there?
OBAMA: Well, I think, you know, how Iran works internally is a, is a pretty complicated thing. Ahmadinejad is just one player among many. Obviously, Khomeini is the, the person who probably has the ultimate power in Iran right now, but I think things are in flux in part because after this election, what we’ve seen is a delegitimizing of that regime. The violations of human rights, what we’ve witnessed on the internet and other venues have, I think, weakened this — this — this government.
So that there are probably a whole bunch of different power sources. And that’s part of what has made this process difficult. I mean, it’s not at all clear that they would have made the same decisions, for example, to reject the international offer that was made by the P-5 Plus One had they felt more secure and more stable. The fact that it came after an election may have, in fact made them dig in their heels a little bit more.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Are you seeing any signs there that they’re ready to change their behavior?
OBAMA: Well, you know, we haven’t seen the kinds of signs that would satisfy me. And that’s why I think we’ve got to keep on pursuing all options. And at this point, the most important option in front of us is — is strong and vigorous sanctions.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Let me ask you about Afghanistan. There’s been something of a war of words between your administration and President Karzai recently. And — and your press secretary, Robert Gibbs, refused to call him an ally the other day. And I think a lot of Americans wonder, if he’s not an ally, why are we putting American lives on the line?
OBAMA: Well, first of all, the reason we’re putting American lives on the line is because 3,000 Americans were killed by an attack that was launched from Afghanistan. And those people are still out there, still plotting to kill Americans.
So the reason the American troops are there, first and foremost, is because we’ve got to make sure that something like that doesn’t happen again. And that means that we are going after al Qaeda to dismantle and destroy them. I say at the beginning of my Afghan strategy, that was our central concern. That remains our singular focus. But in order to do that, what we’ve said is we’ve got to work both in Afghanistan and in Pakistan to create an environment in which these extremist organizations are further and further isolated.
And that means having a stable Afghanistan that has a trained security force, that is not allowing the Taliban to take over huge sections of the country, and potentially allow another platform for al Qaeda to operate. And in that process, what we’ve seen is steady, demonstrable success over the last several months. Now, President Karzai, I think, is going to be a critical partner in this effort, because if we are just succeeding on the military side, but not succeeding on the civilian side, then you’re going to continue to have instability in the region.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Is he a partner now?
OBAMA: Well, I think he has been a partner, but I think that he has his own domestic politics that he has to deal with. I think that — what in my last meeting with him, what I said to him was, the — the most important thing from the United States perspective, the thing we want most, is not to control Afghanistan or have a presence in Afghanistan. We want a prosperous, stable, secure Afghanistan that we can partner with to make sure this isn’t a base for terrorist activity.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But that means he has to be there.
OBAMA: And — and — and that means that he has to adjust and make continual changes and improvements that give his government greater legitimacy. That make ordinary Afghans feel that it is in their interest to support this national government, that they’re seeing better irrigation, that — that their crops are getting to market, and they’re getting a decent price. That there’s rule of law, and they’re not experiencing corruption. That — that people — you know, their government is — is representative of those concer — their concerns.
And I think the fact is, is that real progress has been made, but, you know, this is a country that went through 30 years of — of war. It’s one of the poorest countries in the world. Does not have a tradition of a strong centralized nationalized government. And so, part of President Karzai’s challenge is he’s got to bring his country along into a 21st century in which it is functioning and effective and —
STEPHANOPOULOS: But are you convinced he’s committed to doing that?
OBAMA: I think he is committed to doing that; that doesn’t mean that it’s easy. And that doesn’t mean that there aren’t going to be times when he and I disagree in terms of how things should proceed, and how rapidly things should proceed. But, you know, generally speaking, what I’ve seen is each time I’ve had a conversation with him — one that’s respectful of Afghanistan’s independence and sovereignty and traditions and culture, that I say to him, “Here are some things that are going to make us more effective in partnering with you — to achieve a strong, stable, and prosperous Afghanistan.”
Each time I’ve had those conversations, he’s responded. And the key is to continue to have those frank and honest conversations in a way that allows that strategic partnership to develop, and grow so that we can succeed, again, primarily from our perspective, because it’s national for our national security.
STEPHANOPOULOS: We’re just about out of time. I just have two quick questions. Number one, the governor of Virginia proclaims Confederate History Month in Virginia. What did you make out of that?
OBAMA: Well, you know, I’m a big history buff. And I think that understanding the history of the Confederacy and understanding the history of the Civil War is something that every American and every young American should, should be a part of. Now, I don’t think you can understand the Confederacy and the Civil War unless you understand slavery. And so, I think that was a — an unacceptable omission. I think the governor’s now acknowledged that.
And I think it’s just a reminder that when we talk about issues like slavery that are so fraught with pain and emotion, that, you know, we, we’d better do so thinking through how this is going to affect a lot of people. And — and their sense of whether their part of a commonwealth or part of a — of — of our broader society.
STEPHANOPOULOS: Finally, speaking of history, a new book out by David Remnick, a biography of you, includes a story from the historian Doris Kearns Goodwin. She recounts the conversation she had with you during the campaign where she was really struck by your ambition. She said — she quotes you saying, “I have no desire to be one of those presidents who are just on the list, you see their pictures lined up on the wall.” You’re pretty confident that you’re going to avoid that fate?
OBAMA: Well, look, here’s what I’ve been spending my time thinking about. I’m pretty confident that we’re not going to plunge into a Great Depression, which I wasn’t so clear about a year ago. I’m pretty confident that we’ve stabilized the financial system. I’m pretty confident that economy’s on the mend, and we — that — I’m also pretty confident that we’ve got a heck of a lot of work to do to put people back to work. I’m confident that health care was the right thing to do, and that’s going to be a significant achievement when generations look back on it. And I think this START Treaty that we signed is — is the start of a good direction for American national security policy. But I’m going to wait until I’m maybe 10 years out of office before I start making assessments about how I did.
STEPHANOPOULOS: OK, Mr. President, thanks very much.
OBAMA: All right, thank you, George. Appreciate it.
Jamati Online told interviewed the Mataano twins, Ayaan and Idyl Mohallim, to learn more about their design business and find out what made them tick. Their ability to meld two cultures into a creative, wearable piece was not lost on us, and it seems that we are not the only ones to notice.
Idyl and Ayaan from Mataano
CNN recently highlighted their design house, Mataano, and showcased their pieces on CNN’s Inside Africa program. Isha Sesay highlighted their designs and told their story. Congratulations ladies! It is great to see positive African success stories on the international media. You can read about them on CNN’s International page. They will also be debuting on runways in South Africa later this year, so look out for them!!
In a hint of things to come, Netflix has posted a job listing on their website looking for someone to help build with instant streaming client for Android devices. As far as the candidate is concerned, the company is seeking someone with a strong history of embedded and mobile development. Additionally, they want someone who has implemented video playback on Android-based devices. Experience with DRM technologies as well as other mobile platforms are both considered a plus. If you are interested in applying, head to the job posting on Netflix!
