The Obama Project@WindonWater.net

Andrew Sullivan seems to be in a tiff with Glenn Reynolds over a picture of President Obama and Vice President Biden. This is getting some play on both the left and the right. There’s an accusation of racism being floated at Reynolds, though nothing in his post suggests that that is most definitely the cause for Reynold’s complaint. And yet, some of Reynold’s commenters reveal their racialist bent of mind at his prompting – when asked to caption the photo, some commenters cast President Obama in the role of a drug dealer. Ugh. Because a black man, no matter how accomplished, can be ridiculed with drug dealer jokes, right? If there was no racial intent, my bad, but as the saying goes… if it looks like a duck and quacks like one – it just might be a duck.

More disturbing than cranks on the right with their willful viciousness, is the defense from the left. They assert that when one zooms up close, the president looks “uppity” or “condescending” to his white subordinate, and that this must be what got Reynolds riled up. Maybe so. But having looked at the whole picture, and the zoomed up version, I have yet to see any appearance of uppitiness, condescension, drunkenness, or any other such look. I saw the president listening intently to the vice president, from an angle that forces his eyes downward – because the president is in fact, taller than the vice president.

It seems to me that any attempt to see this in any other light is reaching … and the reach is because the president is black.

Editing to add two points: 1 – the controversy hipped me to the flickr stream – which is just AWESOME. So, I’m glad for that… and 2 – I guess it might be helpful if I upload the picture???

President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden talk before the start of the Kennedy Center Honors at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C., Dec. 6, 2009. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

QT

On President Obama’s Bow to the Japanese Emperor, An Academic Friend Writes That Both the Left and the Right Are Wrong – Political Punch.

This from the article:

“The bow as he performed did not just display weakness in Red State terms, but evoked weakness in Japanese terms….The last thing the Japanese want or need is a weak looking American president and, again, in all ways, he unintentionally played that part.

“BTW, Obama’s bow at Suntory Hall was much better. Correct angle, slight bow. His hands were wrong but the physical tone was correct and appropriate.

Sure. I agree.  Someone buy the President one of those “Doing business in… ” books.  The idea of the Japanese bow is that among equals you bow only slightly as a show of respect, not deeply as a sign of humility.  That said – I’ve read where “Slight bow” means to an equal height… and given the obvious height differences between the president and the emperor… that could have caused some confusion.
Still – we’re a year past the election, almost a year into the presidency, and basic protocols, the kind you can buy info on from Barnes and Noble, are lacking.  Whoever is the protocols overseer is overdue for a performance review…

QT

The White House continues to categorize Fox News as a biased source. There are many ways to look at this, but for me there are two obvious facts: 1, its true… and 2, so what?

Unless I missed something, the president’s advisors are saying that Obama will continue to appear on their shows. Maybe not as frequently, but he’ll show. Meanwhile, they are providing a reasonable service if they stop answering to lies and instead start calling them lies. There is value to having a conservative analysis of the news…. but no value in being lied to in the name of freedom of the press.

Baha’u'llah talks about the excess of liberty… when freedom of speech and freedom of the press is used to protect deliberately misleading statements, we are seeing an example of the excess of liberty.

QT

Really – this requires no commentary. It means the world to me to have this bit of history being made.

I have to put forward a constructive criticism of my president.  President Obama has stated his opposition to gay marriage, but his support for civil marriage, his opposition to Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, and his favorability for equal rights for gays generally.  He has also articulated a distaste for overbroad use of states secrets.

In the case of gay rights, President Obama has stated unequivocably that he wants to move cautiously, but soundly on these issues to produce enduring solutions.  On the states secrets issue, he wanted to find some creative ways of limiting states secrets privilege without damaging the privilege itself.

The presidency is young – not even 1/4th of the first term done.  However, in the short time, President Obama has affirmatively done a lot of things that make people a little uneasy, and some things that look like he’s going back on his campaign promises.  What is needed is definitive ACTION that demonstrates his sense of direction.  I say this because there is definitive ACTION that suggests the opposite of his stated intent.

I’m sure that I’m not really too uncomfortable with the status quo, but for those who believe in what the President is trying to accomplish, and have their hopes pinned on this administration to right these perceived wrongs, I do want to see the President being responsive.

C-SPAN didn’t cover this, so far as I’m aware – so if anyone has more video on this – please share!

POLITICO 44: The Obama Presidency. Minute by Minute 5-12-2009.

Quoted in its entirety:

US climate change denier James Inhofe joins Al Gore in fight against soot | Environment | guardian.co.uk.

He said his concern about the health effects of soot grew from his interest in Africa, where poor families who cook on wood stoves can suffer lung diseases from the soot.

As for the oddness of his alliance with the climate evangelist Gore, Inhofe said: “Al Gore probably would be against automobile accidents and I am too. This has nothing to do with the CO₂ issue.”

But the convergence of interests has raised hopes among environmentalists that it might be easier to reach consensus on the need to act on soot – which is familiar and can be felt and touched – than it has been on greenhouse gases.

“This is a very significant breakthrough from his past positions so we are very pleased,” said Erika Rosenthal of EarthJustice.

In a further twist, Inhofe came out a few days ahead of Gore in drawing the public’s attention to what scientists have recently identified as the main cause of global warming after carbon dioxide.

This is very good news – and the very essence of what we can hope for out of bipartisanship.  Finding areas where we can agree – and making it POSSIBLE for us to agree where we can – is what the Obama brand is all about.  It isn’t bipartisanship if it requires one party or the other to relinquish their principles – it’s only bipartisanship if we create a climate where our “convergence of interests” can be expressed.

Well done, Sen. Inhofe.

The Bigger Picture | By Andrew Sullivan.

I want to take a moment to thank God for the work that Andrew Sullivan has done on this issue.  Andrew Sullivan has a relentlessness that, misapplied, is awful to watch (the “Trip is not Sarah Palin’s baby” thing is an example).  But as is so often the case, what you dislike about a person is often the thing you most admire.  With determination, persistence, and focus – Sullivan stayed on top of this torture issue – and the fruits, such as they are, are now here to see.

I have to admit that I actively avoided the issue for months.  Having become a bit of a fan of The Atlantic, I nevertheless frequently skimmed over or altogether skipped reading Sullivan’s torture posts.  I have to admit – it is a case of cynicism that caused that.  As an African-American, well aware of US history of slavery, brutality, and callous disregard for African-American lives, it wasn’t hard for me to fathom that the United States probably did torture people, and that this was probably nothing new, and really nothing I was going to get worked up about.  Yeah, it’s bad.. but so are a lot of things…. I admit to having a hope that with President Obama, a lot of the bad things would get better, maybe not all at once, but still…  I admit to being perfectly ok with Obama hiding the ugly stuff under the rug – I assumed it was there, had always been hidden, and saw no reason why the nation’s first black president had to take on the job of putting it out in the public – so long as he got the job done of ending some of the worst of it.

As I said – it’s a cynical viewpoint – one that assumes the worst of the United States, while at the same time, hoping for the best, and believing, despite the cynicism, that better is possible.

Now that the memos have been released, I find that my cynicism, so deeply embedded, nevertheless, at no point accounted for anything so awful.  I honestly don’t know what I thought – I’m just taking stock of it all now.  I never imagined there could be such a thing as naive cynicism – but I have to admit that my cynicism was naive.  I was indifferent to the torture issue because I cynically assumed it was par for the course – I naively never believed it was anything this bad.
I want to echo Andrew’s sentiment:

If you want to know how democracies die, read these memos. Read how gifted professionals in the CIA were able to convince experienced doctors that what they were doing was ethical and legal. Read how American psychologists were able to find justifications for the imposition of psychological torture, and were able to analyze its effects without ever stopping and asking: what on earth are we doing?

Read how no one is even close to debating “ticking time bomb” scenarios as they strap people to boards and drown them until they break. Then read how they adjusted the waterboarding, for fear it was too much, for fear that they were actually in danger of suffocating their captives, and then read how they found self-described loopholes in the law to tell themselves that what the US had once prosecuted as torture could not possibly be torture because we’re doing it, and we’re different from the Viet Cong. We’re doing torture right and for the right reasons and with the right motive. Many of the people who did this are mild, kind, courteous, family men and women, who somehow were able to defend slamming human beings against walls in the daytime while watching the Charlie Rose show over a glass of wine at night. We’ve seen this syndrome before, in other places and at other times. Yes: it can happen here. And imagine how this already functioning torture machine would have operated in the wake of another attack under a president Romney or Giuliani.

That speaks volumes.  I guess, cynicism and all, I never believed the US could do anything this bone-chillingly awful.  But we have done it, and we have to account for it.  I’m deeply grateful that we have begun the process.
QT