Archive for March, 2009

The special relationship

Friday, March 6th, 2009

Last week, British PM Gordon Brown paid a visit to president Obama. There were a number of indignities foisted on the PM, including denying him a joint press conference, leaving the British press excluded from the meeting and, finally, his gift to the PM. I didn’t believe this story when I first heard it, thinking it a joke. Alas, it was true.

President Obama gave Prime Minister Brown a 25-DVD box set of classic American films. Prime Minister Brown obviously sees the gift as something of an indignity. The Daily Mail reports that “No 10 had tried to keep the present a secret, refusing to answer reporters who asked what President Obama had given to mark the reaffirmation of the special relationship.” Compared to the gifts brought for Obama by Brown, the DVDs are an embarrassment. Couldn’t Obama at least have thrown in an an autographed copy of The Audacity of Hope?

Brown, being the leader of a great country and aware of his role, gave Obma several fine gifts with real meaning.

The Prime Minister gave Mr Obama an ornamental pen holder made from the timbers of the Victorian anti-slave ship HMS Gannet. The unique present delighted Mr Obama because oak from the Gannet’s sister ship, HMS Resolute, was carved to make a desk that has sat in the Oval Office in the White House since 1880.

Mr Brown also handed over a framed commission for HMS Resolute and a first edition of the seven-volume biography of Churchill by Sir Martin Gilbert.

In addition, Mr Brown and his wife showered gifts on the Obama children giving Sasha and Malia an outfit each from Topshop and six children’s books by British authors which are shortly to be published in America.

An additional insult is the fact that PM Brown is blind in one eye and has diminished vision in the other. The visit was a disaster and followed Obama’s return of a bust of Churchill that had graced the White House for years.

Really showing them that old Chicago class, aren’t we.

Fortunately, we have a highly talented Secretary of State, although her Russian could use some work.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton opened her first extended talks with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov by giving him a present meant to symbolize the Obama administration’s vow to “press the reset button” on U.S.-Russia relations.

She handed a palm-sized box wrapped with a bow. Lavrov opened it and pulled out the gift: a red button on a black base with a Russian word peregruzka printed on top.

“We worked hard to get the right Russian word. Do you think we got it?” Clinton asked.

“You got it wrong,” Lavrov said.

Instead of “reset,” Lavrov said the word on the box meant “overcharge.”

Yes, we have an administration of all the talents.

UPDATE: we have two explanations now. One is that the president is “overwhelmed.” The other is that Britain is not so special.

The Telegraph’s story contains this suggestion that Obama’s slight of the British Prime Minister may have been intentional, at least in part:

The real views of many in Obama administration were laid bare by a State Department official involved in planning the Brown visit, who reacted with fury when questioned by The Sunday Telegraph about why the event was so low-key.

The official dismissed any notion of the special relationship, saying: “There’s nothing special about Britain. You’re just the same as the other 190 countries in the world. You shouldn’t expect special treatment.”

Buyers remorse ?

Wednesday, March 4th, 2009

UPDATE: The Senate blocked the Omnibus spending bill last night with two Democrats decining support. This may be a sign of more disillusionment.

There are the first small tremors of buyers remorse showing up. Even Chris Matthews is sounding disillusioned. Even David Brooks has made a small quibble.

But the Obama budget is more than just the sum of its parts. There is, entailed in it, a promiscuous unwillingness to set priorities and accept trade-offs. There is evidence of a party swept up in its own revolutionary fervor — caught up in the self-flattering belief that history has called upon it to solve all problems at once.

So programs are piled on top of each other and we wind up with a gargantuan $3.6 trillion budget. We end up with deficits that, when considered realistically, are $1 trillion a year and stretch as far as the eye can see. We end up with an agenda that is unexceptional in its parts but that, when taken as a whole, represents a social-engineering experiment that is entirely new.

I’m sure that Obama is trembling in his shoes at this moderate assault.

Christopher Buckley is waving a pinky goodbye to his love affair with Obama.

Hold on—there’s a typo in that paragraph. “$3.6 trillion budget” can’t be right.The entire national debt is—what—about $11 trillion? He can’t actually be proposing to spend nearly one-third of that in one year, surely. Let me check. Hmm. He did. The Wall Street Journal notes that federal outlays in fiscal 2009 will rise to almost 30 percent of the gross national product. In language that even an innumerate English major such as myself can understand: The US government is now spending annually about one-third of what the entire US economy produces. As George Will would say, “Well.”
Now let me say: Unlike Rush Limbaugh, I want President Obama to succeed. I honestly do. We are all in this leaky boat together—did I say “leaky”? I meant “sieve-like”—and it would be counterproductive, if not downright suicidal, to want it to go down just to prove a conservative critique of Keynesian economics.
But let’s all be honest about this: No one knows how all this is going to turn out in the end. Do you, really? If we learned one thing during the runup to this rancid enchilada, it is that most of the smartest people in the room were wrong, and the other ones were crooked.

Oh well, Buckley has had his moment of fame and I’m sure his trust fund is safely invested in the Cayman Islands, like Teresa Heinz Kerry and the Kennedy family. Still, even David Gergen is muttering a bit. Well, a little bit.

It isn’t popular to say right now but there is growing reason to question whether this is the wisest course in terms of our most urgent and pressing challenge: a collapsing world economy. News on the economic front has to be sobering to even the most optimistic among us. Last Friday, we learned that the economy contracted in the 4th quarter by over 6 percent. Over the weekend, Warren Buffett warned that the economy would be in a “shambles” through 2009 and possibly beyond. On Monday, the government issued its fourth bailout for AIG, European ministers rejected a general bailout for Eastern Europe, and the Dow sank below 7,000 – down some 25% since its run-up in January. This Friday economists expect the latest U.S. unemployment numbers to be dismal. Already, the administration’s optimistic economic forecasts for next year look way too rosy.

Well, Obama is not listening to these people. Does he listen to anyone ? Michelle, maybe ?

Even Stuart Taylor is speaking out. Where were these guys last fall ? Buying a pig in a poke, that’s where.

Hang on ! This will be rough. If any of my children who voted for Obama read this, you know who will pay. Even if you don’t want to know, you know. I won’t be there to pay for you.

Our expert president

Wednesday, March 4th, 2009

Yesterday, President Obama shows his talent at stock analysis. He said:

“What you’re now seeing is profit-and-earning ratios are starting to get to the point where buying stocks is a potentially good deal if you’ve got a long-term perspective on it,” Obama said Tuesday.

Would someone please tell me what “profit-and-earning ratios” are ? I’m not an expert, like Obama, and I don’t give advice but what I have read about are “price-earnings ratios.” That means, if the stock costs $50 and yields a dividend of $5 per year, the P/E is 10, usually a good place to buy if the stock is otherwise of value and has good prospects.

I’ve never heard of “profit-and-earnings ratios.” How would you calculate that with most companies showing poor profits or losses. How do you calculate a “profit-and-earnings ratio” for a stock of a company that shows a loss this year?

What this suggests to me is that Obama knows nothing about the stock market, except how to make it fall 20% since the election. I’m not the only who worries.

In fact, the market is collapsing precisely because Obama is doing almost everything wrong when it comes to putting in place a sound long-term strategy — from shaking the confidence of the market and the public, to targeting businesses and the investor class in America, to promising tax increases in a nasty recession, to increasing spending by trillions of dollars, to being clueless about how to deal with the banking crisis and toxic assets. The performance of the market is evidence it has almost no confidence that President Obama and his Administration know what to do to help the American economy regain its footing. And why should it?

Does Iran Has Enough Material For An Atom Bomb?

Sunday, March 1st, 2009

Dueling narratives:

The top U.S. military official said Sunday he believes Iran has enough fissile material to build a nuclear weapon, but Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the Islamic Republic is a long way from having a bomb.

Last week, the International Atomic Energy Agency revised its assessment of Iran’s nuclear capability, saying it was wrong in earlier reports about Iran’s ability to enrich enough uranium to make anuclear weapon.

Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said, “We think they do, quite frankly,” when asked Sunday about Iran’s capacity.

———————————————————————————————————-

I guess we’ll find out soon enough who is right.