Obama earns plaudits from the LGBT community

From El Pais, Spain, 11 October 2009

US President and Peace Nobel Prize Barack Obama, tried on Saturday (Sunday at dawn in Europe) to reassure the LGBT community with an impassioned defence of his commitment for equality. "My commitment with you is unswerving, do not doubt the advances that we're going to make, I'm here with you in that fight", Obama reassured during a speech at the Human Rights Campaign, the biggest organisation defending LGBT rights in the United States.

The community, which decisively backed Obama in last year's elections - and that repeatedly expressed frustration for what they consider has been minimal progress to favour their cause- replied to his words with an ovation. Joe Solmonese, President of the Human Rights Campaign, went as far as defining the night as "historic".

Like he'd stated on previous occasions, Obama reiterated his pledge to end the ban on homosexuals serving openly in the military. The current policy, passed under Bill Clinton in 1993 and known as "Don't Ask Don't Tell", allows homosexuals to serve in the armed forces as long as they don't disclose their sexual orientation.

Regarding the thorny issue of same-sex marriage, the president - who last June timidly granted certain rights to LGBT public servants - vowed to repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act, which discriminates against homosexuals as regard the legality of same-sex unions and other rights. "I'll end all that", he insisted, "and the moment will come when we as a nation will finally recognise that relationships between two men or between two women are as right, real, and admirable as those between men and women".

[note: the article originally appeared in Spanish. This is my translation]

"Change we can't believe in"

Extracts from Mehdi Hasan's article from the New Statesman (UK), Oct 8 2009.

"Barack Obama promised a sharp break from the Bush era, yet he seems to have stepped into the shoes of his disgraced predecessor. As the anniversary of his election approaches, Mehdi Hasan investigates what went wrong".

"The distance between Obama and Bush on a host of policies is not as great as many people might hope or have expected - and it appears to get narrower by the day. This should not, perhaps, come as a huge surprise. One reason for continuity between US presidents - even those who are, on the surface, as different as Bush and Obama - is the nature of the modern imperial presidency, at the apex of a bloated national-security state. As the historian Garry Wills pointed out recently in the New York Review of Books, the president 'is greatly pressured to keep all the empire's secrets . . . he becomes the prisoner of his own power . . . a self-entangling giant'".

Click here to read the article in full.

Obama wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize

From BBC News Online, 9 October 2009

US President Barack Obama has won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize.

The Nobel Committee said he was awarded it for "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and co-operation between peoples".

The committee highlighted Mr Obama's efforts to strengthen international bodies and promote nuclear disarmament.

There were a record 205 nominations for this year's prize. Zimbabwe's prime minister and a Chinese dissident had been among the favourites.

The laureate - chosen by a five-member committee - wins a gold medal, a diploma and 10m Swedish kronor ($1.4m).

"Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future," the Norwegian committee said as the prize was announced.

"His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population."

US missile rethink a huge shift

From BBC News, 17 Sep 2009

By Paul Reynolds, World Affairs Correspondent

"A US decision to drop plans to base an anti-ballistic missile defence system in Poland and the Czech Republic would be a huge shift in American foreign and defence policy by the Obama administration.

The decision was reported in the Wall Street Journal and official word is expected during the day.

Implications

The implications of such a move would include the following:

First, it would be a major signal, which has followed a number of others, that the United States is adopting a far more cautious foreign policy under President Obama than it did under President Bush.

President Bush was determined on the European-based system and agreements had been reached with Poland to base 10 anti-missile interceptors there and with the Czechs for them to house the system's radar.

President Obama ordered a review when he came into office and apparently does not see the need for such a hurry. His experts seem to be telling him that Iran - the cause of all this deployment - is not after all quite so advanced in its ballistic missile technology.

The second effect would be on US relations with Russia. Here the picture will be mixed. The Russians will be pleased and therefore relations will be eased. The Russians had claimed the system might be a threat to them, though the US said it would not. The US felt that the Russians were simply making an excuse to meddle in the affairs of their near neighbours.

But the Russians might also feel triumphant and conclude that their tough approach is one that brings respect and results.

Thirdly, this might indicate that the Obama team will be looking as sceptically at claims that Iran is developing an actual nuclear weapon. That could mean a reluctance to attack Iranian nuclear plants without rock-solid information, though this would not necessarily stop the Israelis from doing so.

Fourthly, the Polish and Czech governments might have mixed feelings. They had invested considerable capital in agreeing to the system. Some hardliners might feel let down. Others might be relieved. There will be debates about the long-term US commitment to Europe.

Fifthly, on the military side, this would herald a shift of emphasis in the whole US anti-missile defence strategy.

According to the Wall Street Journal account, the emphasis will now be on regional defence. The Israeli example might be a good one. The US is co-operating with the Israelis on the Arrow anti-missile missile and on a shorter range missile interceptor known as David's Sling.

Such methods will now come to the fore. And the existing Aegis ship-based defence, already deployed near Japan, will also have renewed importance."

Obama's healthcare speech in the Congress

"We are the only democracy on Earth that allows such hardship for millions of its people".

From BBC News Online, 10 Sep 2009

"Madame Speaker, Vice President Biden, members of Congress, and the American people:

When I spoke here last winter, this nation was facing the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. We were losing an average of 700,000 jobs per month, credit was frozen, and our financial system was on the verge of collapse.

As any American who is still looking for work or a way to pay their bills will tell you, we are by no means out of the woods. A full and vibrant recovery is still many months away. And I will not let up until those Americans who seek jobs can find them".

(CLICK HERE TO READ THE FULL TEXT)

Barack Obama's battle to save US health care reform

Extract from an article by Toby Harnden in the Telegraph UK, 9 Sep 2009

The speech to Congress is seen as so important that it could make or break his presidency.

With Mr Obama's poll numbers slipping and public support for his health care overhaul eroding almost by the day, Senator Max Baucus, a fellow Democrat, drew up a compromise plan designed to appeal to centrists across the political divide.

Republicans have vigirously opposed a mooted extra tax burden on highers earners to pay for medical insurance for the poor. Under the new plan, non-profit co-operatives would be set up to compete with private health insurance companies.

This would replace the idea of introducing a so-called "public option" of government-run insurance, which is favoured by liberals.

The Baucus plan would cost about $900 billion (£550 billion) over 10 years - $100 billion less that the $1 trillion price tag on a previous House of Representatives proposal.

This would partly be achieved by raising $180 billion from taxing insurance companies that offer the most expensive packages.

[Click here for the full article]

Obama invokes grandmother's death in health care debate

Article from Japan Today, 16 August 2009

GRAND JUNCTION, Colorado — President Barack Obama has made it clear that his efforts to reform the U.S. health care system have meaning to him personally.

On Saturday, Obama invoked his own anguish over the death of a loved one as he challenged the notion that Democratic efforts to overhaul the nation’s health care would include “death panels” that decided who would get care and who wouldn’t.

“I just lost my grandmother last year. I know what it’s like to watch somebody you love, who’s aging, deteriorate and have to struggle with that,” an impassioned Obama told a crowd as he spoke of Madelyn Payne Dunham. He took issue with “the notion that somehow I ran for public office or members of Congress are in this so they can go around pulling the plug on grandma.”

“When you start making arguments like that, that’s simply dishonest—especially when I hear the arguments coming from members of Congress in the other party who, turns out, sponsored similar provisions,” Obama said.

Reforming the U.S. health care system is Obama’s top domestic priority and arguably his most challenging political fight yet as president, in no small part because of the vast number of diverse stake-holders involved.

His goal is to ensure health care for everyone in a country with the world’s costliest system and an estimated 48 million uninsured people.

It’s an issue that touches everyone in the United States. There are thickets of competing interests among patients, doctors, drug makers, insurers, labor, businesses and others.

Any plan must get through a Democratic-controlled Congress, where most lawmakers are up for re-election next year. Also, there’s an ideological fault line between Democrats and Republicans, and liberals and conservatives over the level of government involvement in health care.

In a debate in which he often sounds professor-like, Obama on Saturday spoke with a rare bit of emotion that seemed to counter that of vocal health care opponents as he referenced the beloved grandmother who helped raise him and who he called “Toot.”

She died of cancer at age 86 on Nov 2, two days before he won election to become the nation’s first African-American president.

He talked about her death while answering a question about misinformation being spread about Democratic health care efforts during a town hall style gathering in a high school gymnasium.

“Health care is really hard. This is not easy. I’m a reasonably dedicated student to this issue. I’ve got a lot of really smart people around me who’ve been working on this for months now,” he said. “There is no perfect painless silver bullet out there that solves every problem, gives everybody health care for free. There isn’t. I wish there was.”

But he said that because there’s no perfect solution to solving health care, opponents “start saying things like we want to set up death panels to pull the plug on grandma.”

Obama reiterated his contention that the Democratic health care legislation would not create “death panels” to deny care to frail seniors. Obama has explained that the provision that has caused the uproar would only authorize Medicare to pay doctors for counseling patients about end-of-life care, living wills, hospice care and other issues, if the patient wants it.

Conservatives have called end-of-life counseling in government health care programs like Medicare a step toward euthanasia and former Alaska Gov Sarah Palin has likened the idea to a bureaucratic “death panel” that would decide whether sick people get to live. Those claims have been widely discredited but the issue remains a political weapon in the increasingly bitter health care debate.

Over the past week, Obama has fielded questions from audiences in New Hampshire, and Montana, as well as in Grand Junction. Thus far, he’s faced polite crowds, a stark contrast to the taunts and jeers that Democratic lawmakers have endured at similar sessions during their August break.

Much like in the campaign, Obama’s using people’s stories to illustrate his points, railing against interest groups and asking supporters to “rise to this moment.”

In Grand Junction, he sounded much like a candidate again as he adapted a campaign theme.

He likened the health care effort to policy fights that led to Social Security and Medicare system. “These struggles have always boiled down to a contest between hope and fear,” Obama said—a talking point of his candidacy. “So if you want a different future, if you want a brighter future. I need your help.”

[Click here for the original article]