SUMMA POLITICO

BRIEF OPEN LETTER TO CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER

2012-01-20T21:46:00.000-08:00

Conveniently omitted in Charles Krauthammer's
typically skewed version of event at his most recent as of Jan 20th column
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/republicans-legitimize-obamas-reelection-rhetoric/2012/01/19/gIQA5pB5BQ_story.html?wpisrc=nl_opinions

is Bush and the Fed's bailing out the suprfat cats when they were

bankrupt, and ought to have been nationalized for the American
people to gain control of their financial rate instead of it
being left at the mercy of a bunch of utterly selfish riverboat gamblers.

From Enron bankruptcy in the year 200 to the Bush bankruptcy of America in 2008. And Obama differs only very slightly in being what
used to be called a moderate Republican, and solely in domestic policy.

The time is not far off when the disaffection, albeit
ignorant, of the Tea Partiers and the Occuppy Movement
will coalesce and you will have a genuine Amurrican
socialist movement. All that this fortunate eventuality needs
is the spark that will meld and that spark will be a bit of liberation theology so as to infuse evangelical vigor and selflessness, into that great moshpit that is known as Los Estados Unidos Norte , and even the world will not be ever the same. And you heard it here first at:
http://summapolitico.blogspot.com/

-- 

 

 
MICHAEL ROLOFF
>
> http://www.facebook.com/mike.roloff1?ref=name

The Beginning of the end...

2012-01-07T10:42:00.004-08:00

At the invasion of Poland on September 1, 1939,

based on fraudulently manufactured acts of Polish
aggression against Germany, Admiral Canaris [see link
below] is said to have blanched and pronounced:
"This is the end." More properly he might have
reached this rightful conclusion less instantaneously,
and have said: "This is the beginning of the end,"
as bankrupter G.W.Bush's equally criminal invasion of Iraq, based as it was on even less convincing manufactured evidence, will mark the beginning of the of U.S. hegemony.

The Bush Presidency, which started with the bankruptcy
of one of his major supporters, the Enron Company,
ended, for all intents and purposes, with the bankruptcy of the U.S. IN 2008, papered over with trillions of dollars from the Fed to the US Banking Industry. No prosecution by the once head of the Harvard Law Review!

Compared to the dissension and the conspiracies within
the conservative elements of the German military under Hitler the dissent within the American military has been paltry.

I suspect that those interested in compounding the Iraq invasion with an attack on Iran, will have their way, with unforeseeable consequences, none of the pleasant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Poland http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleiwitz_incident

The Gleiwitz incident was a staged attack by Nazi forces posing as Poles on 31 August 1939, against the German radio station Sender Gleiwitz in Gleiwitz, Upper Silesia, Germany (since 1945: Gliwice, Poland) on the eve of World War II in Europe.

This provocation was the best-known of several actions in Operation Himmler, a series of unconventional operations undertaken by the SSin order to serve specific propaganda goals of Nazi Germany at the outbreak of the war. It was intended to create the appearance of Polish aggression against Germany in order to justify the subsequent invasion of Poland.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleiwitz_incident#Events_at_Gleiwitz

Events at Gleiwitz

Much of what is known about the Gleiwitz incident comes from the sworn affidavit of Alfred Naujocks at theNuremberg Trials. In his testimony, he states that he organized the incident under orders from Reinhard Heydrichand Heinrich Müller, the chief of the Gestapo.^[1]

On the night of 31 August 1939, a small group of German operatives, dressed in Polish uniforms and led by Naujocks,^[2] seized the Gleiwitz station and broadcast a short anti-German message in Polish (sources vary on the content of the message). The Germans' goal was to make the attack and the broadcast look like the work of anti-German Polish saboteurs.^[2]^[3]

To make the attack seem more convincing, the Germans brought in Franciszek Honiok, a German Silesian known for sympathizing with the Poles, who had been arrested the previous day by the Gestapo. Honiok was dressed to look like a saboteur; then killed by lethal injection, given gunshot wounds, and left dead at the scene, so that he appeared to have been killed while attacking the station. His corpse was subsequently presented as proof of the attack to the police and press.^[4]

In addition to Honiok, several other prisoners from the Dachau concentration camp^[2] were kept available for this purpose.^[3] The Germans referred to them by the code phrase "Konserve" ("canned goods"). For this reason, some sources incorrectly refer to the incident as "Operation Canned Goods."^[5]

[edit]Context

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Canaris

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Werner_Schrader

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE NY TIMES PUBLIC EDITOR

2011-12-20T14:09:00.003-08:00

Dear Public Editor Brisbane:
THE NY TIMES PUBLIC EDITOR
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/thepubliceditor/index.html
The NY Times coverage of the withdrawal,
allegedly of the last troops from Iraq
and, presumptively forthcoming, from Afghanistan, elicits in me the most succinct of comments on coverages of both events.

Looking at the current coverage,
http://query.nytimes.com/search/sitesearch?query=withdrawal+from+iraq&srchst=cse
you will note a lack of mention of
the State Department's [!] "contractor troops"
[I have read mention of anywhere from 5 to 15,000. See the invaluable Tom Englehardt's TomDispatch
http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175401/tomgram%3A_peter_van_buren,_how_not_to_withdraw_from_iraq/
at the One Billion Dollar [!] Embassy in the "Green Zone" that ghoulishly designated, scabrous establishment. Not only are these accounts by the various NY Times reporters devoid of such mention, but
also, in their briefest of mention of
reasons for the war ["french fries anyone?"]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_to_the_Iraq_War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_and_the_Iraq_War
none ever cites the UN or Atomic Energy commission's opposition [Hans Blix anyone or Donner & Blitzen in a One Horse Sleigh?
No Baraidis allowed!] allude to the fact that
there were no weapons of mass destruction.

At any event, even if there had been, it would
have been another instance of the 19th century
call: "That Indian has a gun." That Indian mucked with my woman, that Indian mucked with me cow! That you, the frontiersmen with your overwhelming force had thousands of guns went unmentioned. Preventive war is nothing new, that gun or in this case that that
Indian might somewhere down the line have a gun
salves whatever if any qualms you may have
about your impulse to conquer and control, to assuage that paranoia that, dammit, that little agenbite, that continues to trouble you into continuing to attack whatever vengeance you fear your actions have provoked.
Long live the imperialist impulse!

BLOWBACK, o me Gawd!

Ditto for the Afghanistan Adventure: no mention everof its destabilization under Carter/ Brzezinski, to involve the Russian in throwing a nation of 25 million to the dogs
of war; or of Reagan/ Casey's creation of the Mujahedim [Osama bin Laden any one?]. Thus if you were reaching reading comprehension
age in 2011 and depended on the NY Times for a modicum you will be left seriously uninformed,
possibly puzzled.

One reason I write is that I have no idea to what extent you have apprised yourself of the controversy occasioned by the
then NY Times reporter Judith Miller
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Miller_(journalist)
A number of stories she wrote while working for The New York Times later turned out to be inaccurate or completely false; and of how well assi the first NY Times Public Editor, Daniel Okrent, and his successor took up that issue. Jack Schaefer covered the Miller affair amusingly at his then slate.pressbox column.

Relievedly, at least, we may be spared further installments of CIA updates in the NY Times OP-Ed pages, courtesy of that ex-choir boy, Michael O'Hanlon, of the Brookings Institute.

A presidency that started with the bankruptcy of Enronended with, for all intents and purposes, with the bankruptcy
of the US!

Sincerely,



Michael Roloff  [as "Summa.Politico"]http://summapolitico.blogspot.com/

  http://www.facebook.com/mike.roloff1?ref=name
Member Seattle Psychoanalytic Institute and Society
http://www.roloff.freehosting.net/index.html

This LYNX will LEAP you to my HANDKE project sites and BLOGS
http://www.handke.scriptmania.com/favorite_links_1.html

"Degustibus disputandum est" {Theodor Wiesenthal Adorno}
"May the foggy dew bediamondize your hoosprings + the fireplug
of filiality reinsure your bunghole! {James  Joyce}
"Sryde Lyde Myde Vorworde Vorhorde Vorborde." {von Alvensleben}
"Siena me fe, disfescimi Maremma." {Dante}
"Ennui [Lange Weile] is the dreambird that hatches the egg of
experience." {Walter Benjamin, the essay on Leskov.}

http://analytic-comments.blogspot.com/
http://summapolitico.blogspot.com/

"CHRIS HEDGES".... FOR PRESIDENT

2011-12-14T08:50:00.004-08:00

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Hedges

CHRIS HEDGES FOR PRESIDENT

BECAUSE
HE IS AS OPPOSED TO IMPERIALISM AS IS RON PAUL
HE IS A FUNDAMENTALIST CHRISTIAN
BUT OF THE GOSPEL
THAT IS OF THE BEATITUDES
BECAUSE HE IS AS ARTICULATE AS MARTIN LUTHER KING
BECAUSE HE KNOWS THAT WE CAN GAIN CONTROL
OF CAPITAL AND NOT BE AT THE MERCY
OF THE CAPITALISTS

NOT MATTER THAT HE CLAIMS TO BE IMPEFECT
AND THAT HE HAS ALLOWED ONE OR THE
OTHER BEAUTY TO SLIP INTO HIS
SLEEPING BAG WHILE ON ASSIGNMENT
AT THE MANY WARS HE HAS SEEN!

http://www.truthdig.com/report/category/hedges/

http://www.alternet.org/authors/5769/

VICE PRESIDENT????
CINDY SHEEHAN

Chris_Hedges

A COMMENT ON ALEX COBURN + PROF. GIBBS TAKE ON LIBYA IN COUNTERPUNCH

2011-11-26T15:55:00.001-08:00

re: http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/11/25/the-%E2%80%9Cleft%E2%80%9D-and-libya/
+ re: http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/11/25/the-%E2%80%9Cdecent-left%E2%80%9D-and-the-libya-intervention/

Dear Alex,
your and Professor Gibbs' two pieces on Libya, much as I agree especially with your take, yet contains
the usual mix of 75 % truth and 25 % Corbuncle [to make a lousy pun] e.g: Gibbs:" The intervention has generated significant dangers to global security: The character of Western policy toward the Libyan despot – by first persuading Gaddafi to give up his nuclear weapons development program and then overthrowing him – has discouraged other countries from abandoning their own nuclear weapons programs. The intervention thus constitutes a setback for international efforts to curb nuclear proliferation. "

Gibbs, tendentiously I would say, elides two unrelated events - Omar the Great giving up on The Bomb + his downfall - into one, whereas The West was getting the oil anyway and generally prefers the solidity of an known s.o.b. to the unknown one or to many who are vying currently. Thus Gibbs asserts a falsehood and then derives, asserts non-consequences from it.

The case that you make out really rests on the assertion that the reporting was second-hand as of a certain
point [" It was the secondhand allegation of massacres that drove both news coverage and U.N. activities – particularly in the early stage, when U.N. Resolution 1970 was adopted, calling for sanctions and the referral of Gaddafi’s closest circle to the International Criminal Court."}
and that Qaddafi never had a chance to answer either via the media or the UN. In court of course you allow even "the mad dog" his growl [about the one instance I happen to agree with one of Ronnie's assessments!], and I will have to take a slog through the voluminous reporting to check how second hand it was.

I would also say that you do yourself no favors by the calumny of the insinuation that because the
CIA may at least have been intelligent enough to consult with Juan Cole, for lack of IQ on its own part,
he nilly-willy becomes "CIA-consultant Juan Cole". Or in calling the rebel council a "jerry-rigged rebel committee in Benghazi" - how can it be anything but under the circumstances?

I miss in both your and Gibbs' assessment any relation of the Libyan phenomenon to the one that had its inception in neighboring Tunisia, referred
to as "the Arab Spring", now lasting well into winter.

I agree but for the qualifier "vague" and "supposed" with statements of yours such as ; "we moved from vague allegations of Gaddafi’s supposed “genocide” or “crimes against humanity” to two separate votes in the U.N. Security Council, which permitted a NATO mission to establish a “no-fly” zone to protect civilians, this latter protection to be achieved by “all necessary measures.” + entirely with: "Also, by late May, it was apparent that the rebels’ military capacities were modest in the extreme, that Ghadafi’s eviction was not going to be the overnight affair, confidently predicted in western capitals and in Benghazi, also that NATO’s bombardments were not having the requisite effect.

Our Bernard Henry Levy seems to have persuaded Sarkozy that this was his main chance.
Respectfully as ever.

I will post this on the much neglected "summa.politico.blog".

http://www.facebook.com/mike.roloff1?ref=name

Michael Roloff [as "Summa.Politico"]

http://summapolitico.blogspot.com/

  http://www.facebook.com/mike.roloff1?ref=name
 Member Seattle Psychoanalytic Institute and Society
http://www.roloff.freehosting.net/index.html

This LYNX will LEAP you to my HANDKE project sites and BLOGS
http://www.handke.scriptmania.com/favorite_links_1.html

"Degustibus disputandum est" {Theodor Wiesenthal Adorno}
"May the foggy dew bediamondize your hoosprings + the fireplug
of filiality reinsure your bunghole! {James  Joyce}
"Sryde Lyde Myde Vorworde Vorhorde Vorborde." {von Alvensleben}
"Siena me fe, disfescimi Maremma." {Dante}
"Ennui [Lange Weile] is the dreambird that hatches the egg of
experience." {Walter Benjamin, the essay on Leskov.}

http://analytic-comments.blogspot.com/
http://summapolitico.blogspot.com/A COMMENT ON ALEX COBURN + PROF. GIBBS TAKE ON LIBYA IN COUNTERPUNCH

MY 9/11 COMMEMMORATION

2011-09-07T16:22:00.000-07:00

My 9/11 commemoration begins with the commemoration of the destabilization of Afghanistan by Carter/ Brzezinski
in 1979 to get the Russian Bear to enter to be bloodied by the CIA - Reagan Casey - organized counter-insurgency by the world wide Mujahedin.

Imagine a nation of 25 million being sacrificed to the whims of cold war ideology! Now if that is not a crime bordering on Auschwitz and the Vietnam War, on what order is it? And Ziggie is still proud of what he did!
imagine letting the Mujahedin then dangle in the wind of their own devices after they had done the job of inflicting
huge losses on the stupid Russian bear? Thus vengeance continues to play out among the Geopolitical Monsters both big and small;and as Noam Chomsky noted the other day:
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/09/06-1
"That Washington was bent on fulfilling bin Laden’s fervent wishes was evident at once. As discussed in my book 9-11, written shortly after those attacks occurred, anyone with knowledge of the region could recognize “that a massive assault on a Muslim population would be the answer to the prayers of bin Laden and his associates, and would lead the U.S. and its allies into a ‘diabolical trap,’ as the French foreign minister put it.”,,The senior CIA analyst responsible for tracking Osama bin Laden from 1996, Michael Scheuer, wrote shortly after that “bin Laden has been precise in telling America the reasons he is waging war on us. [He] is out to drastically alter U.S. and Western policies toward the Islamic world,” and largely succeeded: “U.S. forces and policies are completing the radicalization of the Islamic world, something Osama bin Laden has been trying to do with substantial but incomplete success since the early 1990s. As a result, I think it is fair to conclude that the United States of America remains bin Laden’s only indispensable ally.” And arguably remains so, even after his death."

Not the sort of thing that is said to educate the mourners and traumatized in New York of course,
not even by the Drone Master Nobel Peace Prize Winner, President Obama..

http://www.facebook.com/mike.roloff1?ref=name

http://summapolitico.blogspot.com/

NEW YORK TIMES REFUSES THE TRUTH EVEN ON A COMMENT BLOG

2011-08-21T15:49:00.001-07:00

several times at

http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2011/09/11/us/11portraits.html?sort=oldest&offset=3#preview

It was rejected both times. It follows the guidelines but the news or the thought it seeks

to elicit appears to be too controversial. In utter disgust with the NY Times,

very truly yours,

http://www.facebook.com/mike.roloff1?ref=name

http://www.roloff.freehosting.net/index.html

"Remember that the United States, under President Carter and National Security Advisor Brzezinski destabilized Afghanistan in 1978/79 to draw in the Russians and that President Reagan and C.I.A. Casey organized the Mujaheddin to fight the Russians once they had been drawn into Afghanistan. Z. Brzezinski is still proud of what he did then. The Majaheddin were left dangling in the wind after they had done the job of severely decimating the Russians with American supplied arms, especially Stinger missiles, to bring down the Russian helicopters. Osama bin Laden was a CIA assett at one time - who became disenchanted and vengeful. It is more than just a shame that the Afghan people - all 25 million of them, and then the people in New York, suffer the consequences of politics on high. http://www.facebook.com/mike.roloff1?ref=name

SEIZED AT LAST: BUSH + COHORTS SEIZED OFF KENNEBUNKPORT

2011-05-27T21:09:00.000-07:00

AND AIR LIFTED TO DUTCH SUBMARINE

THAT WILL TRANSPORT BUSH, CHENEY, AND RUMSFELD TO DEHAGUE
TO BE TRIED FOR CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY.

Wikileak Cables Trove that bribery, extortion and embezzlement rule ithe US

2010-12-03T21:12:00.000-08:00

Kabul —
AKBAR ROSTAMI/ NASIBA ALIMYAAR/ Abdul Rahman Sultani

http://www.kw.af/english/

From hundreds of diplomatic cables, the U.S emerges as a looking-glass land where bribery, extortion and embezzlement are the norm and the honest official is a distinct outlier.

Describing the likely lineup of the congress , the the Afghan Embassy noted that most of the new members of the house of representatives, be they Republicans or Democrats were bankrolled by huge industrial concerns or by banks, assuring these entities that no matter who won they would maintain their control. This is called "doubling your bet" in American, and it works. Dennis Kucinich appears to be the only congress person about whom no allegations of bribery exist.

One official helpfully explained to diplomats the “four stages” at which his colleagues skimmed money from American development projects: “When contractors bid on a project, at application for building permits, during construction, and at the ribbon-cutting ceremony.” In a seeming victory against corruption, Congressman Rangel of NY, was mererly censure for gross violations of ethic rule, proving that at least when it comes to cruption there is no "color bar" in the U.S. But a cable from the embassy told a very different story: Mr. Rangel was a victim of “kangaroo court justice,” it said, in what appeared to be retribution for his attempt to halt a corrupt land-distribution scheme.

It is hardly news that predatory corruption, fueled by a booming illicit narcotics industry, is rampant at every level of U.S. society. Transparency International, an advocacy organization that tracks government corruption around the globe, ranks the U.S as the world’s third most corrupt country, behind Somalia and Myanmar, but ahead of Afghanistan and Serbia and Albania and Kosovo and Romania.

But the collection of confidential diplomatic cables obtained by WikiLeaks and made available to a number of publications, offers a fresh sense of its pervasive nature, its overwhelming scale, and the dispiriting challenge it poses to American officials who have made shoring up support for the US government a cornerstone of America’s strategy .

The cables make it clear that American officials see the problem as beginning at the top. An August 2009 report from Kabul complains that President Obama was elected with $ 750 million from the Banking Industry
The embassy was particularly concerned that President Obama welched on nearly 50 of his campaign promises and that his electorate was becoming dispirited. The odds on Sarah Palin winning the nomination and the Presidency in 2012 are at 2:1 at the Kabul betting parlors, slightly higher than the Vegas line.

The American dilemma is perhaps best summed up in an October 2009 cable sent by the famous addict Ambassador Karl W. Eikenberry, written after he met with Ahmed Wali Karzai, the president’s half brother, the most powerful man in Kandahar and someone many American officials believe prospers from the drug trade. (Mr. Karzai denies any involvement with narcotics trafficking.)

“The meeting with AWK highlights one of our major challenges in Afghanistan: how to fight corruption and connect the people to their government, when the key government officials are themselves corrupt,” Ambassador Eikenberry wrote. "I myself didn't get my cut."

Afghan officials seem to search in vain for an honest partner. A November 2009 cable described the acting governor of Khost Province, Tahir Khan Sabari, as hoping that General Patreus might be “a refreshing change,” an effective and trustworthy leader. But Mr. Sabari told his American admirers that he did not have “the $200,000-300,000 for a bribe” necessary to secure the job permanently.

Ahmed Zia Massoud held the post of first vice president from 2004 to 2009; the brother of the Northern Alliance leader Ahmed Shah Massoud, he was discussed as a future president. Last year, a cable reported, Mr. Massoud was caught by customs officials carrying $52 million in unexplained cash into the United Arab Emirates.

A diplomatic cable is not a criminal indictment, of course, and in an interview Mr. Massoud denied taking any money out of Afghanistan. “It’s not true,” he said. “Fifty-two million dollars is a pile of money as big as this room.” Yet while his official salary was a few hundred dollars a month, he lives in a waterfront house on Palm Jumeirah, a luxury Dubai community that is also home to other Afghan officials. When a reporter visited the dwelling this year, a Rolls-Royce was parked out front.

The cables describe a country where everything is for sale, where Ponzi schemes are rampant,
where the bankers whom the Obama administration saved with the bail out are again giving
themselves bonuses in the hundred of millions

Then again, another cable reports “rumors” that President Obama himself “was involved in a corrupt oil import deal.” He denied the rumors, saying that they were inventions by two rivals who were “among the most corrupt in Chicago,” the cable said.

OBAMA METER UPDATED

2010-08-16T09:23:00.000-07:00

SEPTIMUS …THE OBAMBACY.. AT ONE YEAR PLUS NINE MONTHS, nearly half of his term, the hot air presidency…

OBAMA, PROMISE KEEPER

a roundup of specifics ....
TO BE SUNG TO THE TUNE OF

“SMOOTH OPERATOR”

BRAND OBAMA
STILL ROTS MY TEETH!

Severus ObamBus

At 21 of his 48 months

http://www.roman-emperors.org/sepsev.htm

More Caramel, more Sugar, Sweeter smiles, Friendlier embraces Gentler noises

The same big shtick The same formula Different tactics, Same Strategy

that’s what you can call the same old same old Coke

Yup, the New Coke Tastes nearly Like The Old

The Sheeples still sort of like It

they’re still drinking it up

Yes, we will be happy earning Chinese slave laborers wages as Larry Summers nods out at the first Cabinet meeting!
Yes we can! Keep things the same old same old!

Fill the gas bag with hope!

Laughing gas?

One more time

While the disenchanted sheeples

Are drinking a nasty brew of tea!

OBAMBI’S FIRST 21 MONTHS

a.k.a. the Goldman-Sachs Presidency

Never met a General he didn’t love

A Rubin that wasn’t Rubenesque…

20+ BROKEN PROMISES

5 KEPT [sort of]

FAR MORE CONTINUITY THAN CHANGE Ought the continuities be considered broken promises,too?

This just in: ctd. Bushies Military Commissions!!!

continues renditions

[with safeguards no less! wow!]

Bailed on not supporting the Marriage act, i.e I can’t live in bigamous bliss with my Goat Chiquita and Burro Durango

Mountain tops in the Appalachians ctd. to be exploded off and ruining the stream;

continue signing statements!!!

Opposes….

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/08/AR2009060804117_pf.html

Obama: New Financial Rules Will Keep 'Worst Traits In CheckAP Source: Same-Sex Partners To Get Fed Benefits'

Dorf: The Obama Administration Defends the Defense of Marriage Act

http://news.lp.findlaw.com/ap/a/w/1151/06-17-2009/20090617022003_06.html

Obama FCC Nominee Comes Out Against Fairness Doctrine -- Will Conservatives Finally Stop Freaking Out?
By Jason Linkins, Huffington Post

http://www.alternet.org/blogs/media/140748/obama_fcc_nominee_comes_oOut_against_fairness_doctrine_--_will_conservatives_finally_stop_freaking_out/

No change on Nafta=broken promise

Limit defendants rights= broken promise

http://news.lp.findlaw.com/ap/a/w/1154/04-24-2009/20090424013507_20.html

Claims sweeping executive secrecy powers.=broken promise

USE OF PRIVATE CONTRACTORS or you could call it:

CONTINUITY = I.E. NO CHANGE. so the same guys that used to work for “agua negra” now XE work for DinCorps, big diff! but not for interrogations?? who needs them anyway if you’ve got the c.i.a. doing it???

Closes Gitmo? WELL, it’s still ¾ open but ctd.

Bagram: no change even in hypocricy:

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/13/opinion/13mon1.html?ref=opinion

Despite Obama's Disarmament Vow, Missile Shield Continues, defense, fewer of one plane, more of another; “defense” budget increases by 70 billion; same old twice a year “supplementals!!” promised not to do any!

of which I never get a one

for “EErak” and Af-Pak and Greater Waziristan!

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/04/06

Vermont Single-Payer Advocates Remind President Obama of What He Once Believed!

http://www.commondreams.org/video/2009/03/19-0

continues drilling, broken promise,

brief hiatus on the Gulf Spill occasion

broken promise….

SIXTEEN MONTHS WITHDRAWAL DEFERS TO PENTAGON OR ALL THOSE GENERAL AND ADMIRALS IN THE ADMINISTRATION DEFER TO HIM =

BUT LET’S GIVE THE GUY A BREAK:

PUT IT DOWN TO PROMISE KEPT,

sort of with 50 k troops and bases in perpetuity… after all, he expressed pleasure and surprise at the success of “the surge”… without seeming to understand the payoffs involved?? and he’s from Chicago??

All right we’ll give him a promise sort of kept the best that you’re gonna get anyhow…

8]TORTURE: PROMISE BROKEN = JUST SIGNED EXECUTIVE ORDER ALLOWING FURTHER RENDITIONS… AH AND WHAT CESAR WILL RENDER UNTO ME TO BE RENDERED IS EX-VEEP CHENEY, HOW THE FAT WILL DRIP OFF THE SPIT BEFORE I TAKE OUT HIS COLD ELECTRIC HEART!

It’s really Cheney’s Mom’s fault says Dr. Bialistock [Dr. Bernard Bail] would say

Dick’s Mom bequeathed her evil

being to her son of a bitch…

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/01/31-3

FOREIGN POLICY = NO CHANGE [CLINTON] GENERAL CONTINUITY SO HE’LL TALK SOME MORE, BIG DEAL! General Jones! That’s a new one me!

IRAN POLICY ONLY WORDS SO FAR…

He’s “troubled” by a meaningless election.

PENTAGON = NO CHANGE [GATES] CONTINUITY

A'STAn NO CHANGE EXACTLY THE SAME, EVEN WORSE NOT A NEW IDEA TO BE FOUND, EXCEPT EXPANSION INTO PAKISTAN! divide and conquer the Taliban is US 19^th century Indian policy on a global scale. But that was one promise

He certainly kept.

CHANGE

1] ENERGY POLICY - LOOKS LIKE CHANGE SO FAR

2] CIA = CHANGE, AT LEAST AT THE TOP, though Penetta at his confirmation hearing allowed that under certain circumstances he too might allow torture.

3] UN = CHANGE=ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE WALRUS AMOUNTS TO CHANGE THOUGH MS. RICE IS WHAT IS CALLED A HUMANITY HYENA WHO ARE FAR MORE DANGEROUS THAN THE COYOTE PACK NEAR WHERE I LIVE IN SEATTLE…But hasn’t been in the news at all “our girl at the U.N.”

But she has been very low key so far.

NAT SEC ADVISER = CONTINUITY

ECONOMIC POLICY = ABSOLUTE AND COMPLETE CONTINUITY FOR THE MONEY ELITE, some regulation in the offing, yea, you bet, caps of half a million on earnings for those who are on the government dole!

SAME FOLKS WHO GOT U.S. INTO THE FIX WE’RE IN ARE SUPPOSED TO BAIL US OUT WILL BAIL OUT THEIR KIND AT GOLDMAN SACHS.

LABOR = SLIGHT CHANGE, BUT DID NOT MENTION THE LAW THAT HE BACKED IN HIS CAMPAIGN TO MAKE ORGANIZING UNIONS EASIER WHEN HE MET WITH LABOR LEADERS. I.E. VERY TEPIC CHANGE AT BEST COMPARED TO WHAT LABOR MIGHT HAVE EXPECTED SINCE THE REALLY WENT TO BAT FOR THE GUY DURING THE CAMPAIGN… WHAT IF THEY HAD STAID NEUTRAL???

DEPT OF INTERIOR = VERY MODEST CHANGE

ENLISTING SUPPORT OF EVENGALICALS AND FAITH-BASED INITIATIVE = NO CHANGE FROM THAT KIND OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT IN RELIGION

FBI = NO CHANGE, SAME GUY

ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY LOOKS LIKE REALLY VERY MODEST CHANGE WITH KEN SALAZAR AS HEAD OF THE DEPT OF INTERIOR, EXCEPT FOR AFOREMENTIONED MOUNTAIN TOPS WHICH KEEP BEING CHOPPED OFF DESPITE ALL THAT HOT AIR DURING THE CAMPAIGN

Change in Cuba policy made dependent on “Cuba’s release of political prisoners “[does that include u.s. hired assassins?] sweet noises at a meeting in South America…

It’s the sweet noises presidency..

Tax cuts on those earning more than 250 K a year, promise was to revoke, let’s see if it really happens, though the budget is now premised on it.

EDUCATION? FOR THE WORSE: SEE:

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175022/andy_kroll_will_public_education_be_militarized_ BUT IT IS A CHANGE
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/12/17-4
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/01/11-11 http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/4039/why_cynics_are_wrong/

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/jan2009/obam-j17.shtml

http://www.truthdig.com/report/page3/20081215_rep_dennis_kucinich_on_his_battle_with_the_banks/

Obama pledged to veto any bill rejecting the request, meaning he is beginning his presidency not by “turn [ing] the page on policies that have put the greed and irresponsibility of Wall Street before the hard work and sacrifice of folks on Main Street,” as he once pledged. Instead, he is promising a mushroom cloud unless lawmakers let taxpayer cash continue to flow to the biggest of Big Money interests

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090115_fool_me_once/

http://www.slate.com/id/2208935/pagenum/2

FAIR # OF SPECIFICS STILL TO COME:

ctd. belligerence toward Russia? during the campaign just like McCain. But it appears there might be real change in the offing, too early to tell whether it is merely cosmetic and for publicity’s sake…

regulate the money people, the bundlers who put him in office???? no way, Josay!

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20081205_keeping_track_of_change/

http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2008/12/16-16

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/12/16-11

Hey, you Liberal Democrats. You may have won the election, but you're getting CREAMED in the transition.

Today, President-elect Barack Obama stuck it to you. He's chosen Arne Duncan as Secretary of Education.

Who? Duncan is most decidedly not an educator. He's a lawyer. But Duncan has this extraordinary qualification: He's Obama's pick-up basketball buddy from Hyde Park.

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/12/16-10

US military prepares for Obama’s expansion of Afghan war

US General David McKiernan, told journalists: "I don't like to use the term ‘surge' here, because if we put these additional forces in, it's going to be for the next few years, this three - or four-year period. It's not a temporary increase of combat strength."

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/dec2008/afgh-d13.shtml

MICHAEL ROLOFF [as summa.politico]
http://www.facebook.com/mike.roloff1?ref=name

Member Seattle Psychoanalytic Institute and Society

This LYNX will LEAP you to my HANDKE project sites and BLOGS
http://www.handke.scriptmania.com/favorite_links_1.html

http://www.roloff.freehosting.net/index.html

"Degustibus disputandum est." Theodor Wiesenthal Adorno
"May the foggy dew bediamondize your hoosprings + the fireplug
of filiality reinsure your bunghole! {James Joyce}
"Sryde Lyde Myde Vorworde Vorhorde Vorborde." [von Alvensleben]
"Siena me fe, disfescimi Maremma." [Dante]
"Ennui [Lange Weile] is the dreambird that hatches the egg of
experience." Walter Benjamin, the essay on Leskov.

http://analytic-comments.blogspot.com/
http://summapolitico.blogspot.com/
http://artscritic.blogspot.com/

COLOR CODE: YELLOW= CONTINUITY. I.E. NO CHANGE

:BLUE = PROMISE KEPT AND/OR CHANGE

………………….GREY=AS YET UNDETERMINED

SCOREBOARD:

11 ELEVEN NO CHANGE/BROKEN PROMISE

8 [EIGHT] CHANGES, SOME VERY MODEST

LOTS OF GREY UNDECIDED AREAS

1] USE OF PRIVATE CONTRACTORS CONTINUITY = I.E. NO CHANGE

2] SIXTEEN MONTHS WITHDRAWAL DEFERS TO PENTAGON OR ALL THOSE GENERAL AND ADMIRALS IN THE ADMINISTRATION DEFER TO HIM = BUT LET’S GIVE THE GUY A BREAK: PUT IT DOWN TO PROMISE KEPT

3]TORTURE: PROMISE BROKEN = JUST SIGNED EXECUTIVE ORDER ALLOWING FURTHER RENDITIONS… AH AND WHAT CESAR WILL RENDER UNTO ME TO BE RENDERED IS EX-VEEP CHENEY, HOW THE FAT WILL DRIP OFF THE SPIT BEFORE I TAKE OUT HIS COLD ELECTRIC HEART!

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/01/31-3

4] FOREIGN POLICY = NO CHANGE [CLINTON] GENERAL CONTINUITY

5] IRAN POLICY ONLY WORDS SO FAR

6] PENTAGON = NO CHANGE [GATES] CONTINUITY

7] A'STAn NO CHANGE EXACTLY THE SAME, EVEN WORSE NOT A NEW IDEA TO BE FOUND, EXCEPT EXPANSION INTO PAKISTAN!

8] ENERGY POLICY - LOOKS LIKE CHANGE SO FAR

9] CIA = CHANGE, AT LEAST AT THE TOP

10] UN = CHANGE=ANYTHING OTHER THAN THE WALRUS AMOUNTS TO CHANGE THOUGH MS. RICE IS WHAT IS CALLED A HUMANITY HYENA WHO ARE FAR MORE DANGEROUS THAN THE COYOTE PACK NEAR WHERE I LIVE IN SEATTLE…

12] NAT SEC ADVISER = CONTINUITY

13] ECONOMIC POLICY = CONTINUITY

SAME FOLKS WHO GOT US INTO THE FIX WE’RE IN ARE SUPPOSED TO BAIL US OUT WIL BAIL OUT THEIR KIND

13] LABOR = SLIGHT CHANGE, BUT DID NOT MENTION THE LAW THAT HE BACKED IN HIS CAMPAIGN TO MAKE ORGANIZING UNIONS EASIER WHEN HE MET WITH LABOR LEADERS.I.E. VERY TEPIC CHANGE AT BEST COMPARED TO WHAT LABOR MIGHT HAVE EXPECTED SINCE THE REALY WENT TO BAT FOR THE GUY DURING THE CAMPAIGN… WHAT IF THEY HAD STAID NEUTRAL???

14] DEPT OF INTERIOR = VERY MODEST CHANGE

15] ENLISTING SUPPORT OF EVENGALICALS AND FAITHBASED INITIAVE = NO CHANGE FROM THAT KIND OF UNCONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT IN RELIGION

16] FBI = NO CHANGE

17] ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY LOOKS LIKE REAL CHANGE

18] NAFTA PROMISED RENOGATIONS????

19] Change in Cuba policy made dependent on “Cuba’s release of political prisoners “[does that include u.s. hired assassins??]

20] Tax cuts on those earning more than 250 K a year, promise was to revoke, now he’s changed his mind. BROKEN PROMISE

21] EDUATION? FOR THE WORSE SEE:

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175022/andy_kroll_will_public_education_be_militarized_ BUT IT IS A CHANGE

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/12/17-4

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/01/11-11

http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/4039/why_cynics_are_wrong/

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/jan2009/obam-j17.shtml

http://www.truthdig.com/report/page3/20081215_rep_dennis_kucinich_on_his_battle_with_the_banks/

Obama pledged to veto any bill rejecting the request, meaning he is beginning his presidency not by “turn[ing] the page on policies that have put the greed and irresponsibility of Wall Street before the hard work and sacrifice of folks on Main Street,” as he once pledged. Instead, he is promising a mushroom cloud unless lawmakers let taxpayer cash continue to flow to the biggest of Big Money interests

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090115_fool_me_once/

http://www.slate.com/id/2208935/pagenum/2

THERE ARE OF COURSE A FAIR # OF SPECIFICS TO COME:

a] ctd. belligerence toward Russia? during the campaign just like

c] regulate the money people, the bundlers who put him in office????

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20081205_keeping_track_of_change/

http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2008/12/16-16

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/12/16-11

Hey, you Liberal Democrats. You may have won the election, but you're getting CREAMED in the transition.

Today, President-elect Barack Obama stuck it to you. He's chosen Arne Duncan as Secretary of Education.

Who? Duncan is most decidedly not an educator. He's a lawyer. But Duncan has this extraordinary qualification: He's Obama's pick-up basketball buddy from Hyde Park.

http://www.roloff.freehosting.net/index.html

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2008/12/16-10

US military prepares for Obama’s expansion of Afghan war

US General David McKiernan, told journalists: "I don't like to use the term ‘surge' here, because if we put these additional forces in, it's going to be for the next few years, this three- or four-year period. It's not a temporary increase of combat strength."

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/dec2008/afgh-d13.shtml

A LETTER TO SULZBERGER OF THE NEW YORK TIMES ABOUT THEIR SUPPORT FOR THE AFGHAN WAR

2010-08-15T18:08:00.000-07:00

Message from mikerol@gmail.com:

 Dear Mr. Sulzberger,
Below a short Brechtian poem that your frequent op-edder Michael O'Hanlon elicited from me - and which your appalling editorial of Friday the 13thhttp://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/13/opinion/13fri1.html?_r=1&ref=editorials
makes me share with you. http://www.roloff.freehosting.net/index.htmlOnce again, no mention of the U.S. destabilization of that country of 25 million in 1979,a monstrous crime of which Mr. Brzezinski continues to be proud;once again no mention of the world wide genii the Mujaheddin of Casey/ Reagan's devising,and now it is world wide and it means forever war, and it might break the bottle.And yet another NY Times version of "Marja" - if you want to know why people do not trust news sources, something my former county executive Ron Sims, now secretary of HUD, bemoaned the other day,just look at your own editorial and the way the NY Times reported something as simple as Marja - starting out with a reprint of the Pentagon Press release. This is not just Bush's and now Obama's war, but yours!This war again reminds me that the US is like that dog that gets stuck in the bitch and can only get in deeper, and there is no one with a bucket of ice water to help it out of its distress. It's the same old same old imperialist moron, over and over again.Sincerely, MICHAEL ROLOFF

HOW TO FAIL A STATE…

A failed state
Is like a dwarf star
It never made it, poor thing
It needs a think-tank to keep it on life-support,
Michael O’Hanlon of The Brookings perhaps…
He’s good for a new set of suggestions every month…
I’m sure he goes to church on Sunday and prays for failed and failing states…
And gives no end of Fs

Instruction on how to produce a a “failed state”:
Get a Stan of some kind, rattle its government in your money maker…
Create a fright…
Get an interested party to intervene…
Initiate an uprising against the invader…
What the hell, the U.N. won’t mind.

Lots of things you can do…
No end of opportunities…
But first you need to define a state… Well, there must be a government that holds the majority shares of violence power to dispense, yes Flower Children, that’s how things are…

Thence you find something that approximates the definition…

You destabilize something that ends in Stan… or Lia..
its becomes shaky…
the outlying provinces are not in its control..

You get a foreign power to invade it… say, some bears, or coyotes or ants…

You support an insurgency against the occupation…

You supply it with weapons…

When the insurgency is a spectacular success
You parade a few of its leaders for the media…
the invader withdraws, licking wound…
withers on the vine because congress, with mission accomplished, won’t fund it any more…

now the insurgency fends for itself in a country wide civil war between insurgency leaders transformed into war lords…
if you have a special animosity for them you call them thugs…
what the hell
call them anything you want
nothing they can do about it anyway

Now Michael O’Hanlon has his a geographic entity that he can call a “failed state”, something like a dwarf star, poor thing, that never had its shining day… and you bring in the think tanks to think upon the misery.

You hold conferences…
Someone gets another degree…
You hand out grants…
You import some left over insurgents that want to study law or maybe also start a Stan restaurant of some sort…
You find some bleeding hearts…
And everything is cool unless it isn’t.

OBAMA THE DECISION MAKER SO WHAT IF GOING ABOUT IT "SANELY" YOU ARRIVE AT THE SAME "INSANE" CONCLUSIONS BUSH DID!

2010-08-07T14:26:00.000-07:00

Thinking about John Dean's description of Obama's sane style of governance [see below], based as that estimate is on Jonathan Alter's book, it occurred to me what difference if any it makes if you govern sanely or insanely and from the vestigial part of the brain, your viscera, like Bush but reach the same conclusions and make the same decisions! I.. Afghanista, bailing out the bankers , keeping same national war apparat. xx michael r.

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20100806.html?DCMP=NWL-pro_top

	How Our Decider-in-Chief Decides: Decisionmaking and the Obama Presidency
	By JOHN W. DEAN
	Friday, August 6, 2010

Nothing is more important in the American presidency than decision-making. It is, in fact, the very essence of the job. Presidential decisions can and do shape our history, for better or worse. Rarely, though, does the decision-making style of presidential candidates receive much attention during a campaign. One exception was the 2008 presidential race, where it was very much an issue. Now that President Obama has been in office for some eighteen months, it is appropriate to take a look at his decision-making skills.

Over time, a president's supporters and detractors will inevitably have reason to disagree with some of the decisions he makes. But I believe that it is the way a president makes major decisions that is of importance. Not even a president's top staff will agree with all his actions. But a president's ability to engage in intelligent decision-making to deal with the countless matters that arrive on his desk is vital to the well-being of the nation.

President Bush's Dreadful Decisions Made Decision-Making An Issue in 2008

Bad decisions by a president have serious consequences. We are still dealing with the fallout from the horrific decisions of the last president -- unilateral preemptive attacks on perceived enemies who were incorrectly suspected of harboring weapons of mass destruction; ever-escalating costs for two unbudgeted wars; shaming the nation with torture techniques; wrecking a strong and flourishing economy inherited from his predecessor, etc., etc. Most decisions that were made by George W. Bush employed no real process or considered thought whatsoever.

President Bush was well-known for his messianic and intuitive decision making. He bragged and boasted about it. He told Bob Woodward, during an extensive interview for Bush at War, that he was not "a textbook player," but rather a "gut player," repeatedly explaining that he relied on his "instincts" in following "God's master plan." And when his Defense Secretary was under attack for his part in the dire mess in Iraq, with calls for his resignation, Bush went to his defense, giving a further, distinctive marker to his decision-making: " I'm the decider," Bush petulantly declared, "and I decide what is best. And what's best is for Don Rumsfeld to remain as the secretary of defense." Rumsfeld was gone some six months later.

Bush's disastrous decisions regarding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan -- not to overlook his devastating decisions that all but destroyed the American economy -- resulted in serious attention being focused on the decision-making styles of the 2008 nominees during the last presidential campaign. The mainstream news media carefully examined how Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama might each make decisions as president. For example, here are a few representative looks: Some six weeks before the election PBS ran "John McCain's Decision Making" and "Confidence, Openness Mark Obama's Decision Making Style"; a month before the election the Boston Globe published "The Next Decider: The election isn't just a referendum on ideology. It's a contest between two modes of thinking"; and shortly before the voters went to the polls the Wall Street Journal rhetorically stated, "Lawyer or Jet Pilot: It's the Decision," when raising decision-making as an issue.

The fact that McCain was a Bush-style intuitive, from-the-gut decision-maker probably cost him the election. Not only did voters not want more of a Bush-style president, but McCain's impulsive campaign decisions -- selecting his un-vetted vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin, and then precipitously closing down his campaign in its final days to deal with the financial crisis but offering no solutions -- proved deadly. These were seen as previews of the very same peremptory decision-making style Americans had experienced for almost eight years, and the election showed that Americans did not want more of the same.

Jonathan Alter's Study of Obama as Decisionmaker: A Deductive Thinker with a Vertical Mind

With Obama now having been in the White House for a year-and-a-half, we have an early record of what kind of decision-maker he has become as president. Jonathan Alter has written the first important examination of the Obama presidency -- The Promise: President Obama, Year One -- and in chronicling Obama's first year in office, Alter looked closely at the new president's decision-making style

Alter, a Newsweek editor and author, has covered Washington and the presidency for years. As a U.S. Senator, Obama had read and admired Alter's last work, The Defining Moment: FDR's Hundred Days and the Triumph of Hope (2007), and President Obama granted Alter full access to his White House, an opportunity which Alter did not waste. This bestseller takes readers inside the Obama White House for a look at the players and how they work. It is a great read. But here, I am only exploring Alter's reporting with respect to Obama's decision-making, in particular.

Given the attention that Obama's decision-making received during the campaign, it is not surprising to find that, as president, he is making decisions in a very similar fashion. While Obama has had no serious executive experience, he is something of a natural, with his decision process following a pattern that he first developed as a law student when he headed the Harvard Law Review. The approaches to decision-making that Alter found in the White House are not very different from the approaches Obama developed during the campaign, and which were reported by PBS.

For purposes of comparison, however, Alter looks at the style of other presidents as well. Alter finds that Obama's decision-making style falls "somewhere between [President Bill] Clinton's deep if gauzy discussions and Bush's snap judgments based on instinct." "Clinton was volcanic and discursive; Obama [is] cool and focused," Alter reports.

Alter continues, "Clinton was an inductive thinker with a horizontal mind. He talked to people in wide-ranging college bull sessions (or late at night on the phone) to establish a broad array of policy and political options, then looked at them in context and fashioned a synthetic and often brilliant political approach out of the tangled strands of analysis." By comparison, Alter concludes, "Obama [is] a deductive thinker with a vertical mind." Obama thinks "deeply about a subject, [and] organiz[es] it lucidly into point-by-point arguments." Obama favors "decision memos that include options but contain clear policy recommendations." Obama places "more faith in logic than imagination," and insists "on a process that [is] tidy without being inflexible." Clinton constantly second-guessed his decisions; Obama makes a decision and moves on, unless new and compelling evidence arises.

Why the Charge that Obama Dithers Is Completely Off the Mark

Contrary to Dick Cheney's claim that Obama is a ditherer, Alter found that he is anything but. Unlike the Bush/Cheney White House, Obama wants all the available information, so he probes his staff (and their staff) and the departments and agencies heads (and their staff); he encourages dissent rather than yes-people; and he listens carefully when his aides and advisors speak, although he wants them to get to the point and make it. Obama instructs his White House to keep the big picture in mind, not play "small-ball" or get "down in the weeds."

If Obama does not understand, he does not pretend otherwise; rather, he will ask questions. Obama often changes his approaches on issues during meetings, so that his staff is not sure where he stands, and thus, his aides and advisors are prevented from simply telling him what they think he wants to hear. As meetings come to a close, it is Obama who typically summarizes the various positions and points-of-view under consideration -- usually more succinctly and eloquently than they have been presented by their own advocates -- before making his decision, which is a clear "takeaway" from the session and is well-understood by all. When an issue has been fully flushed out and examined, Obama does not want matters "re-litigated."

Jon Alter is too good a journalist, and spoke with too many people, to have been "spun" about Obama's decision process, which by previous White House standards is quite remarkable. If this approach is consistently employed for major and important decisions, it is an exemplar of how most serious students of the presidency would want presidential decision-making to be done. Few presidents have employed such a thorough process, or been so apparently conscious of the need to adopt a specific approach to decision-making. President John Kennedy learned the hard way, after his failed decision-making in authorizing and then abandoning the Bay of Pigs invasion in Cuba, but then got it right during the Cuban Missile Crisis, establishing a procedure that he might then have followed consistently, had his presidency not been cut short.

President Obama, it would appear, is writing the textbook for presidential decision-making. From Jon Alter's reporting, and from observing the Obama White House from a distance, I would only raise one question.

Is Obama's Decision-Making Too Devoid Of Emotion?

Alter describes, and gives context and perspective to, President Obama's remarkable "cool" -- his self-confident demeanor, his striking calmness during crisis and troubles, and his highly-focused mind. With Obama, there are no Clinton "purple fits" or tantrums; and no Bush emotional "go with the gut" reactions, says Alter.

Yet Obama understands, apparently, that being too cool is not good. Nonetheless, Obama has often been compared to the overly-composed, emotionless and highly rational Mr. Spock from the Star Trek series, because of the way he too relies on reason rather than emotion, and uses logic to enter the minds of other people. Alter reports that the president has a good sense of humor about all this, and indeed, when a new Star Trek movie was released in early 2009, the president had it screened at the White House. For several days thereafter, President Obama "got a kick out of flashing the Vulcan salute" to his staff. The conclusion that Alter draws from Obama's unflappable nature and "no-drama" White House is that it is an "asset in decision-making."

During the past few decades, an evolving and growing cognitive science of decision-making has emerged. It is the work in part of political and social scientists, economists, and psychologists, who are empirically testing and studying decision making styles. Their endeavors are complemented by those of neurologists and neuroscientists who have literally looked inside our brains to observe them in real-time during decision- making, through the use of increasingly sophisticated magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) tools; this research is giving them hard facts about how our mental equipment functions. (See the Boston Globe story I cited earlier for a broad overview of these developments.)

I have been exploring this science for another project, and while my study is early and the field is vast, it seems clear that emotions are very much a part of good decision-making. This much is clear: While Vulcans may make great decisions without emotions, humans do not do so very well. The key is striking the right balance, and if Jonathan Alter has it right, and Obama's style is somewhere between that of Bill Clinton and George Bush, we may have one of the better decision-makers currently residing in the White House.

Let us hope that is the case, for as the decider, Obama will have any number of very difficult decisions to make that will affect us all; indeed, he has already had momentous decisions before him, early in his presidency. Because I am not sure, I am going to make certain that the cognitive scientists whose work I am studying (and with whom, in several cases, I have spoken) are aware of Alter's reporting, for they will know well how to evaluate our President's decision-making skills. I will keep you posted.

John W. Dean, a FindLaw columnist, is a former counsel to the president.http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20100806.html?DCMP=NWL-pro_top

Dear Mr. Sulzberger, regarding Marc Reuel Gerecht's Op-Ed

2010-06-15T19:44:00.000-07:00

Dear Mr. Sulzberger,

Why is it that your OpEd Pages publish a piece such as Marc Reuel Gerecht's that after blathering on about Karl Popper

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/15/opinion/15gerecht.html?ref=opinion

then contains the following utter lie:

"The millions who voted in 1997 and 2001 for Mr. Khatami, a clerical apostle of cultural integration, were telling us that for them, this is really no longer a big problem. Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, who ruled from 1941 until the revolution, failed in his dream of turning Iranians into Germans... "
The Shah was installed by the US after it overthrew the democratically elected Mossadegh, even some first grader
know this. So much for democracy: if you're not one of our kind of democratic S.O.B.s the so forthright
Jeanne Kirpatrick used to say... you are a contra! And you allow your valuable space to be occupied by the injudiciously named Gerecht.
Mossadegh was overthrown by Kermit the Rabbit as you may recall, and it some other industrious animal took
care of Guatemalan democracy about the same time, in the early 50s. Instead of embracing the wave of world history,
national liberation, the US became the successor regime of European imperialist impulse, allied itself with no end of fascists, and dictators, and continues to do so, who were nearly as evil as Hitler, with hideous consequences
for the world, and everyone but the military industrial complex in the U.S. and its courtiers such as Mr. Gerecht
and Michael O'Hanlon and his ilk from Brookings who appears monthly in your pages.
The eliding of truths of the most simple matters in this instance and in your reporting on the history of the US involvement in Afghanistan cannot possibly win you many readers.
Sincerely,

"Chicquita abracas a todos"

MICHAEL ROLOFF

http://www.facebook.com/mike.roloff1?ref=name
Member Seattle Psychoanalytic Institute and Society
These two main LYNX will LEAP you to my HANDKE project sites and BLOGS

http://handke-magazin.blogspot.com/

2] http://www.handke.scriptmania.com/favorite_links_1.html

http://www.roloff.freehosting.net/index.html