Is she planning to start a campaign for president? I think that’s a bit premature. Governors don’t usually resign this far in advance and start campaigning. I have a feeling that something is going to come out of Palin’s closet and she’s just resigning in advance.

Of course this is quite annoying as I was hoping Palin would run in 2012 and help the Democrats win again. Dammit!

Jamie Foxx, the host of the Black Entertainment Television music awards, was unequivocal on Sunday night. “We want to celebrate this black man,” Mr. Foxx said of Michael Jackson. “He belongs to us and we shared him with everybody else.”
…
Mr. Jackson was to music what Michael Jordan was to sports and Barack Obama to politics — a towering figure with crossover appeal, even if in life some of Mr. Jackson’s black fans wondered if he was as proud of his race as his race was of him. But since his death on Thursday, many African-Americans have embraced Mr. Jackson without ambivalence. In scores of interviews across the country over the weekend, few expressed the kind of resentment some once had for his strangeness, his changing appearance, his distance from the cherubic Michael of the Jackson 5.

I can understand the sentiment behind this – Michael Jackson was the first big black icon. So naturally African Americans feel a sense of ownership. But there is a danger here isn’t there? If every black person represents or belongs to the community then you end up defending the bad (OJ, Mike Tyson) along with trying to claim the good (MJ).

This happens a lot in the UK too. For the longest time, in the national newspapers, if one Muslim or black person did something bad then it was seen as representative of the entire ‘community’. Taking that cue from the papers – the same people end up trying to police everyone and condemning anyone from their community who steps out of line as bad.

I think it’s time to kill this attitude. Even the words ‘community’ or ‘communities’ should be banned. Who says white people belong ‘to communities’? And yet you see journalists now refer to minorities as belonging to ‘communities’ instead of one community. That’s not really an improvement is it. They should use ‘families’ or refer to them as individuals.

But Obama’s speech was widely expected. Some even thought he wouldn’t mention Israel / Palestine, but then Obama has always been one to grab the bull by the horns.

But, why Egypt and not Indonesia?

“I like to go to the sources of the problem not around it,” he said, adding that giving the speech in Indonesia would be “almost like cheating” because Indonesia and the US have generally very strong ties and that because of his background having lived in Indonesia and having a sister who is half Indonesian, he would have “home ground” advantage and he did not want that.

Here are some reactions positive, negative and insane (video included)…

POSITIVE
Stephen Walt at Foreign Policy blog:

I thought his handling of the Israel-Palestinian issue was clear and straightforward, He reaffirmed both the bedrock U.S. commitment to Israel’s existence and security and the necessity of an independent Palestinian state. He understands — even if others do not — that “this is in Israel’s interest, Palestine’s interest, America’s interest and the world’s interest.” He also rejected the poison of Holocaust denial and “vile stereotypes about Jews” in clear and direct language, and told his listeners that such beliefs helped prevent “the peace that the people of this region deserve.” I wish he had offered a few more specifics, but overall he handled this issue well.

M.J. Rosenberg writes:

Mission accomplished. For the first time in memory, an American President spoke to Muslims and Arabs not as antagonists who need to take certain actions before achieving US acceptance but as equals.

Jeffrey Goldberg in the Atlantic:

An African-American President with Muslim roots stands before the Muslim world and defends the right of Jews to a nation of their own in their ancestral homeland, and then denounces in vociferous terms the evil of Holocaust denial, and right-wing Israelis go forth and complain that the President is unsympathetic to the housing needs of settlers. Incredible, just incredible.

He also managed to unite everyone! (from here)

Kadima, MK Ze’ev Boim:

Obama’s speech is further proof that Netanyahu did not properly gauge the policies of the Untied States. The policies of the president on the Palestinian issue are identical to those of Kadima, and it is unfortunate that Netanyahu is unable to accept the idea of two states for two peoples for narrow political reasons.

Labor, MK Eitan Cabel:

The president’s words made it very clear that in Washington they are unwilling to turn a blind eye. Time is working against us, and the Israelis interest of not being a serial rejector means accepting two states for two peoples and stopping construction of settlements.

Nabil Rudeineh, Spokesman for President Abbas:

His call for stopping settlement and for the establishment of a Palestinian state, and his reference to the suffering of Palestinians. . .is a clear message to Israel that a just peace is built on the foundations of a Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital. President Obama’s speech is a good start and an important step towards a new American policy.

Hamas leader Mahmoud Ramahi:

I have followed the speech closely. There are many positive points. There is a difference between his policy and Bush’s policy. I see a change in the U.S. foreign policy discourse. But the problem is still on the ground. Would they achieve a Palestinian independent state? If he does that, that would be a relief and good for all parties.

NEGATIVE
Ira Stoll on the conservative Commentary Magazine:

Even when Obama was trying to be nice to Israel, he was tone deaf: “America’s strong bonds with Israel are well known. This bond is unbreakable. It is based upon cultural and historical ties, and the recognition that the aspiration for a Jewish homeland is rooted in a tragic history that cannot be denied,” he said. The missing words were those usually present in such passages about shared democratic values and strategic interests.

This video, shot in Israel, has some downright racism against Obama

via Max Blumenthal

FULL SPEECH

And one of the points I want to make is, is that if you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we’d be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world.

Guess what Spectator Magazine’s Melanie Phillips had to say?

Just what planet is this US President on? Or is this not a statement but an aspiration?

Oh yeah, whoops! Barack Hussein Obama mistakenly blurts out his plan to convert America to Islam by stealth! Phillips is so absurd that even fellow blogger Alex Massie couldn’t help but mock her:

This is intriguing and I’d be interested to learn how the President might make the United States an islamic nation. Surely this was something he should have mentioned on the campaign trail? Clearly, his reticence about this confirms the seriousness of his intent. All the most dangerous plots are kept secret, dontcha know? Only the bravest and wisest can penetrate the conspiracy and sound the necessary alert.

The kind of conspiracy loons that Melanie Phillips now attracts is evident by the comments. One says:

It’s because he is a Muslim.

Born as one, educated in early years at a maddrassa, pictured in muslim dress. Even, gasp named Hussein. What’s not Islamic about any of that?

Then the missing records. The birth certificate. The education records.

Not forgetting that grovelling bow.

I felt that the idea of a black potus was extremely laudable. However of all the suitable black people in the US they pick this marxist, racist and divisive product of the Chicago machine.

Nothing will surprise except for the fact that the US is still in thrall.

Pajamas Media, Atlas Shrugs and Family Security Matters are good places to start if anyone needs a little education outside the MSM.

It’s more amusing that the Spectator Magazine is happy to continue publishing such conspiracy loons.

This strikes me as one of those idiotic regulations which does no good and plenty of harm. Sikhs have long served honourably in the British armed forces (and elsewhere), without the British armed forces ever feeling the need to pressure them to conform. It is therefore clearly not an impediment to active service, nor is it any way slovenly. It has been argued that the sight of turbaned Sikhs in British uniform became such a common sight prior to Indian independence, that when Sikhs in Britain were agitating for the turban to be exempted from helmet regulations, there wasn’t widespread opposition to it because people had already come to associate turbaned Sikhs with martial valour.

The most eloquent testament to turbaned Sikhs serving in the armed forces comes from the British general Sir Frank Walter Messervy:

“In the last two World Wars 83,005 turban-wearing Sikh soldiers were killed and 109,045 were wounded. They all died or were wounded for the freedom of Britain and the World, enduring shell fire with no other protection but the turban, the symbol of their faith.”

(Hat-Tip: Ravneet at the Sikh Coalition)

I’m not going to write a lengthy tirade, re-regurgitating past opinions about the rights or wrongs about the invasion, the lies we were told to sell us on the venture or the horrendous number of people killed as a result.

Nor am I going to lay in to the former lefties who backed this war. I figure a thread for reflection and remembrance and perhaps a little hope of what may be possible for the future might suffice.

Where were you on the night the bombing started? What were your thoughts? Do you see a better future for the country and it’s people?

Since entering office Mr Obama has overturned a number of policies that religious conservatives hold dear, such as a ban on government aid for family-planning groups that promote abortion in poor countries. Plans are also in the works to rescind a regulation enacted in the dying days of the Bush administration that gives health workers a “right of conscience”, protecting them from the sack if they refused to co-operate in certain medical procedures (mainly abortions). Social conservatives are also upset with Eric Holder, the new attorney-general, for confirming that the federal government will no longer take action against medical-marijuana clubs, which are legal in some states.

None of these reversals is a surprise, but conservatives have been taken aback at the unflinching speed of the changes. Mr Obama may be emboldened by his solid victory—he does not need the support of religious conservatives to govern. And for all the talk of bipartisanship and Mr Obama’s courting of religious voters during his campaign, their voting patterns did not change much at all, so he owes them little.

Obviously, I’m overjoyed. All those people who said Obama was nasty and bad for reaching out to conservatives and wouldn’t really be liberal-left in power are now eating their words. On domestic policy his record is stellar: pro-union, pro-science, pro-civil rights, pro-civil liberties and pro-feminist. On foreign policy: not so good. As many generals have already said, the new administration has placed a firm emphasis on diplomacy over military action. But not much action has followed. For a start he should have gone further in embracing Cuba. That the neoconservatives will be crying into their cornflakes will be amusing to watch; I also want to know what British neocons, who constantly accused the left of “anti-Americanism”, will say now.

This also raises some questions about political positioning. Frank Rich thinks the cultural warriors on the right have lost because of the recession. But it’s also undeniable that Obama neutered a lot of criticism by sounding genuinely non-partisan during his campaign. He didn’t make a big song and dance about being on the left or right – he simply laid out what he believed in. Nevertheless, religious conservatives still didn’t really vote for him. What does that say about his pragmatic strategy?

Added: Interesting…the columnist with the best access to the prez is a conservative, who can neutralise or convince the very audience you need to reach out to while pushing effectively a leftwing agenda. Obama is as smart as I thought he was.

President Obama said, “Vivek Kundra will bring a depth of experience in the technology arena and a commitment to lowering the cost of government operations to this position. I have directed him to work to ensure that we are using the spirit of American innovation and the power of technology to improve performance and lower the cost of government operations. As Chief Information Officer, he will play a key role in making sure our government is running in the most secure, open, and efficient way possible.”

The only other South Asian person to be offered a role was the Surgeon General position! Being medics and geeks, is that all we’re good at?? Well, at least the American tech industry are ecstatic. Heh.

Mr. Obama would overhaul health care, begin to arrest global warming, expand the federal role in education and shift more costs to some corporations and the wealthiest taxpayers.
…
Mr. Obama would slash about $5 billion in the coming year for direct payments to agribusinesses and farmers with more than $500,000 in annual revenue, and $4 billion in annual subsidies to private banks that make college loans. Instead he would increase spending for government Pell Grants to needy students, and for the first time index the maximum yearly grant for inflation.
…
Departing from the free market orthodoxy of his predecessor, George W. Bush, Mr. Obama would use the government’s powers of spending and taxation to push the private market in new directions. With higher taxes on the wealthy and savings squeezed from health care providers, drugmakers and insurers, Mr. Obama would create a $634 billion, 10-year “health reform reserve” as a down payment to finance disease prevention, wellness programs and research on cost-effective treatments ultimately to cut health care costs. More than any other expense, health care is driving future projections of unsustainable deficits. The health reserve would also be used to create affordable insurance programs for individuals and employers.

I know right-wingers will be spitting blood, but obviously I love it. I helped elect this man – that feels good.

If it sounds like Jindal is targeting his speech to a room full of fourth graders, that’s because he is. They might be the next people to actually vote for Republicans again.

Heh.

The statement says:

No country should have to face rockets fired at its citizens, and we condemn Hamas’s launching of rockets into Israeli civilian areas. But the solution is not raining bombs and missiles down on one of the most densely populated sites in the world, making massive civilian casualties inevitable, and which, apart from its immorality, guarantees only another generation of hatred towards Israel. The solution — as the Israeli peace movement, human rights groups, and the United Nations have urged — is to lift the economic blockade imposed on Gaza and end the Occupation.

The statement ends with a call for an immediate end to U.S. military aid to Israel. “We do not want our tax dollars or the leaders who speak in our names to continue supporting the attacks on the Palestinian people.”

On a related note, Tony Lerman – former head of Jewish Policy Research thinktank – wrote two excellent articles that deserve plugging. On in the Guardian and one in Prospect mag – on how Jews in the UK and USA are speaking out against Israel’s actions.

All the Islamic parties lost ground, especially that associated with the so-called ‘Shia firebrand’, Moqtada al-Sadr, whose share of the vote went down from 11% to 3%. The principal Sunni Islamic party, the Islamic Party of Iraq, was wiped out. Instead, a new generation of Iraqi politicians is coming forward. Many of them are young and secular. They have lived always in Iraq, not in exile; they are Iraqis with local roots first and foremost – they are not pan-Arabs or pan-Islamists. Nor do they have connections to the US.

I hate to rain on the parade but that doesn’t yet negate the ongoing cost of this huge blunder.
The Nation magazine this week looks at Bush’s legacy:

We have a better grasp of the human costs of the war. For example, the United Nations estimates that there are about 4.5 million displaced Iraqis–more than half of them refugees–or about one in every six citizens. Only 5 percent have chosen to return to their homes over the past year, a period of reduced violence from the high levels of 2005-07. The availability of healthcare, clean water, functioning schools, jobs and so forth remains elusive. According to Unicef, many provinces report that less than 40 percent of households have access to clean water. More than 40 percent of children in Basra, and more than 70 percent in Baghdad, cannot attend school.

The mortality caused by the war is also high. Several household surveys were conducted between 2004 and 2007. While there are differences among them, the range suggests a congruence of estimates. But none have been conducted for eighteen months, and the two most reliable surveys were completed in mid-2006. The higher of those found 650,000 “excess deaths” (mortality attributable to war); the other yielded 400,000. The war remained ferocious for twelve to fifteen months after those surveys were finished and then began to subside. Iraq Body Count, a London NGO that uses English-language press reports from Iraq to count civilian deaths, provides a means to update the 2006 estimates. While it is known to be an undercount, because press reports are incomplete and Baghdad-centric, IBC nonetheless provides useful trends, which are striking. Its estimates are nearing 100,000, more than double its June 2006 figure of 45,000. (It does not count nonviolent excess deaths–from health emergencies, for example–or insurgent deaths.) If this is an acceptable marker, a plausible estimate of total deaths can be calculated by doubling the totals of the 2006 household surveys, which used a much more reliable and sophisticated method for estimates that draws on long experience in epidemiology. So we have, at present, between 800,000 and 1.3 million “excess deaths” as we approach the six-year anniversary of this war.

That is a staggering figure. So anyone who feels completely vindicated by these elections because they’ve made apologies for it over the past six years need to do some serious re-evaluating.

1) Problems caused by Third World immigration into western countries
2) Racial differences in intelligence and how to deal with them
3) The Islamic Threat (!!!!!!!)
The speakers, naturally, are ace. There is Srdja Trifković. According to Richard:

Among the slew of anti-Muslim screeds published in recenty years, one of the more prominent was The Sword of the Prophet, by Serge Trifkovic. Despite Trifokovic’s dubious background as a former spokesman for Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic (although he also spoke against Slobodan Milsoevic), he was embraced by American conservatives – paleo and neo – as yet another expert who dared to tell “the truth” about Muslims and Islams. Here he is on Frontpage, discoursing on the subject with fellow polemicists Robert Spencer and Walid Shoebat.

Then there is Pat Richardson, apparently the first Jewish member of the BNP to be elected to public office. Then there is Peter Brimelow, who hosts the “white nationalist” website Vdare.com. Naturally there’s a lot of people talking about immigration and Muzzzzlims. The organiser is a certain Dr Hart who once said that a Yugoslavia-type ethnic conflict in the United States could be avoided by a voluntary partition of the country into three states: an integrated mixed-race state, a white state, and a black state.

These people are a hoot! There’s just one thing… why hasn’t anyone told Douglas Murray about it?

Sohale Siddiqi (also Hal Siddiqi) was the best friend and roommate of Barack Obama while he attended Columbia University in the early 1980s. He is identified as “Sadik” in Obama’s memoir, Dreams From My Father. Obama describes Saddiqi as “a short, well-built Pakistani” who smoked marijuana and snorted cocaine. Siddiqi was from Karachi, Pakistan and came to America from London on a tourist visa. He overstayed his visa becoming an illegal alien. [1]

Obama first met Siddiqi when he attended Occidental College in Los Angeles. Obama was living with a group of Pakistani students when Siddiqi arrived for a visit. Obama transferred to Columbia University and lived off campus with Siddiqi. Siddiqi was not a student and made his living working in restaurants. Together they lived in a drug-ridden slum apartment on 339 East 94th St. Siddiqi go the apartment by lying, saying he had a well paid job. The apartment was furnished by what they could find in the streets. Obama and Siddiqi would go out together and enjoy the nightlife of New York City. Siddiqi claims Obama stopped using drugs when he arrived at Columbia. Obama eventually moved out when Siddiqi’s partying began to interfere with his studies.

via Sepia Mutiny.

Oh but there is! No, I don’t mean far-leftie Lenin, who will shout Uncle Tom regardless, but pro-Israel organisations in US. Apparently Mitchell is too even-handed: “Sen. Mitchell is fair. He’s been meticulously even-handed. But the fact is, American policy in the Middle East hasn’t been ‘even handed’ — it has been supportive of Israel when it felt Israel needed critical U.S. support. So I’m concerned. I’m not sure the situation requires that kind of approach in the Middle East.”

So the head of the (US) Anti-Defamation League not only admits foreign policy has been supportive of Israel, but thinks someone “even-handed” in a conflict is dangerous where the only way forward should be more support for Israel. This rather reminds me of those bloggers who scream “moral equivalence” when talking about Israel/Palestine. Apparently, they all want peace, but you can never, ever, ever be even-handed by treating Israel and Palestine equally! I mean… they’re…. Muslims! Even to treat them equally is favouritism! If you don’t believe how nutty these organisations are, see this.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration has finally issued a proper statement on Gaza:

I was deeply concerned by the loss of Palestinian and Israeli life in recent days and by the substantial suffering and humanitarian needs in Gaza. Our hearts go out to Palestinian civilians who are in need of immediate food, clean water, and basic medical care, and who’ve faced suffocating poverty for far too long.

Oh, he also said Israel should end the blockade. Chaaaaange is comin!
[Also see this beautiful portrait in the NYTimes about Obama's very diverse and multicultural family]

Obama has inherited victory in Iraq. Bush has done more than, as McGurn quotes Biden in early 2007, “keep it from totally collapsing…[until he could] hand it off to the next guy.” Now rather than retreat in defeat, our new president must manage to withdraw American troops without undermining their success. It will be a tremendous challenge, but the press will not be able to blame Bush if security deteriorates in Iraq after Obama gives the Joint Chiefs their “new mission.” The victory in Iraq is Obama’s to lose.

LOL. Aren’t you glad these deluded people aren’t in power now?

We start with a speech by Trevor Phillips, who is paying homage to Obama only weeks after he slammed Obama in Prospect magazine! Anyway, it’s a day of celebration so I won’t get too bitchy. Harriet Harman was on a bit earlier and was short and sweet.
I have my Obama t-shirt on, woohoo!

As Peter Huber and Mark Mills point out in their 2005 book, “The Bottomless Well,” “Economic growth marches hand in hand with increased consumption of electricity — always, everywhere, without significant exception in the annals of modern industrial history.”
…
In late June 2006, Israeli aircraft fired nine missiles at the transformers at the Gaza City Power Plant, the only electric power plant in the Occupied Territories. (One of the original partners in the project was Enron, but that’s another story.) The missiles caused damage estimated at $15 million to $20 million and, for a time, made Gaza wholly reliant on electricity flows from Israel.
…
Thus the U.S. was providing fuel and materiel to the Israeli military, which destroyed the plant, but it was also paying to fix the damage. Call it cradle-to-grave service. The Israeli attack on the Gaza City Power Plant offers a stark example of how the FMS fuel helps assure that Israel stays energy rich while many of the citizens in neighboring regions live in energy poverty.

Two weeks after the attack on the Gaza City plant in 2006, during Israel’s monthlong war against Hezbollah forces in Lebanon, Israeli aircraft attacked the 346-megawatt Jiyyeh power plant, the oldest electric power plant in Lebanon. Those attacks resulted in the largest-ever oil spill in the eastern Mediterranean. About 100,000 barrels of fuel oil that was stored in tanks at the Jiyyeh site flowed into the sea, creating an oil slick that stretched for more than 150 kilometers.

Apparently, the Israeli government also care for Palestinians.. as long as they remain poor and destitute.