On Saturday I found myself in the middle of a conversation I’d more of less had at exactly the same time a week earlier. The proximity of the two conversations, the extremity of the claims, and the ease with which they were voiced to me leads me to believe on an admittedly flimsy basis that these views are probably fairly commonplace among young people here.
First, young Argentines don’t think Barack Obama is black. Eminem, I was told in one instance, is black. Barack Obama and his million dollar Harvard education is not. I haven’t gotten the impression that middle aged Argentines feel the same, though I will own up to my my absurdly small sample that is mostly comprised of taxi drivers (how Tom Friedman of me) that distinguish the two impressions. This point is not entirely lacking intellectual merit if one considers sociological constructions of whiteness but seems to fly in the face of what I believe is an important accomplishment of the American people.
Second, I heard a certain degree of doubt that 9/11 was a terrorist attack exogenous of all motives except those of extremists, the average American belief, though I am still confused about who then is the guilty party. It’s too strange that the twin towers, so potent a symbol of American capitalism, would just fall like that – too coincidental, too structurally improbable – and it’s too coincidental that the 9/11 attacks would be used to justify an otherwise unjustifiable invasion of the sovereign state of Iraq. The second point I can hang with; the American people were repeatedly misled by false claims of ties between Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden. But the first reminds me of Holocaust deniers. Call me naïve but I would never dream that my government could ever play a hand in the slaughter of nearly 3,000 of its own innocent civilians. I wonder if the implausibility is diminished if you’ve grown up in a part of the world that still feels the impact of the other September 11 and a country which disappeared over 30,000 of its own citizens.
While I think I have a more-than-acknowledged conservative streak at home, it’s pretty clear that I fall to the left of the American political spectrum. Here, however, I feel like I go to bed with Milton Friedman and William Kristol books under my pillow. When Fede cheekily asked if I identify as neoliberal I don’t think he expected the answer to be yes. I do think that after a period of protected initial growth, it is in the interest of most states to be open to free trade. That does not mean entirely lacking export diversity and focusing on soy, as is the case here. It also does not mean that I think the results of Menem’s extreme privatization campaign have been wonderful for Argentina, as the foreign-owned outright monopolies have hindered competitiveness for what used to be public goods, driving up costs for consumers while reducing both domestic jobs and domestic tax revenue. But it does mean that I think foreign direct investment, international competition, and appropriately curtailed state ownership is ideal. As polemical and probably offensive it is to say so here, I do think the American idea of the liberal democracy is the ideal form of government.
With that I will go back to my pillow-worn copy of Atlas Shrugged and Ronald Reagan's memoirs.
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Politics. Show all posts
Monday, May 11, 2009
Thursday, May 7, 2009
100-something days
When I started this blog I said I would write about three things: Buenos Aires, politics, and music. I’ve managed to cover two of those categories extensively while outright dropping the third. It’s not that politics at home haven’t been kicking ass – they have – I just haven’t really had it in me to write about them. But since I am comfy watching Trial’s epic set from Burning Fight and getting my chomp on some Oatmeal Squares, but not particularly interested in doing actual homework, I will finally address some recent thoughts I’ve had.
One party Congress? I was pretty stoked for Specter’s switch if only as some sort of shameful vengeance for my frustration with him during the Bush SCOTUS nominee confirmation process. But contrary to my well-known partisanship, it bums me out that Republicans are such an irrelevant party. For the moment I am happy to have a basically filibuster-proof majority in the Senate (oh MN!) because it’s about time the government got some serious shit done – thank you Republican Congresses for putting off healthcare and immigration reform, exacerbating the problem of global warming by doing nothing about it, etc. – but I would generally be happier if there was a more two-sided debate occurring on the Hill. In the most Mill of thought processes, I genuinely believe that public policy is of a higher quality when both sides shape the process and (Burke) curb each others excesses. Although I strongly disagreed with the arbitrary decisions of the “Gang” of moderates, and by no means mean to hold them as the ideal, it would be good to have a well-supported intellectual challenge to the borrow-and-spend policies of the Obama administration, not Club for Growth tea parties and Michael Steele temper tantrums.
About time! One of my favorite refrains about Barack Obama is that he was the first Millennial generation candidate and the first Millennial generation president. I know he is technically too old to be a member of my generation but I strongly believe that he resonated with the youth so much this fall because his political philosophy mirrors that of my generation. Examples of this abound but I will cherry pick three particular policies which confirm my expectation.
First, I am thrilled about the Ted Kennedy Serve America Act. The law triples the size of AmeriCorps and increases available education subsidies for said volunteers, a worthy example of presidential leadership – and a stark contrast to Bush’s post 9/11 request that we “go shopping…” At the bill signing ceremony, President Obama prominently acknowledged my generation’s commitment to national service:
On some level I know that choosing this as my first example is kind of pathetic, a bipartisan pat-yourself-on-the-back bill that is about as controversial as loving puppies, but the truth is that I see a bill like this as a true act of leadership, a demand for Americans to serve each other at a time when we’re feeling alienated, scared, and expecting our government to serve us.
Second, thank you White House for fighting the good fight for students. It’s about time that student loan reform was a political issue. The plan ends the system of middle men, terminating private student lending and makes all loans directly through the government. It also adds a bunch more money for Pell Grants and Perkins Loans. I don’t think the plan is perfect – I continue to be concerned about the insufficiency of increases to financial aid in assisting middle income families – but man is it a step up from the predatory system of student loans currently in practice. I wish everyone, or namely just my favorite Senator Bill Nelson and his Nelnet buddies in Omaha, had the sense to see how good of an idea this is.
Third, the changes in the administration’s policy towards Cuba are a harbinger of good to come. They’re not extensive but they are at the very least an extremely meaningful act of political symbolism and, from all indications, step one in a series of new steps US-Cuba and inter-hemisphere relations. OAS leaders seemed also to think so. This definitely fits my generation's post Cold War attitude.
Hardest job in America. I definitely don’t think the administration has been doing an absolutely complaint-free perfect job. Governing, especially now, is tough stuff. To take one example, I’ve been frustrated not to see a decisive, coherent approach to Guantanamo. (Note what I am NOT saying here.) The Bush administration really cornered those who have come after, saddling the Obama administration with a furious collection of radicalized prisoners under dubious self-made constructions of laws of war. I do believe Obama’s people are stuck between a rock and a hard place – bringing the prisoners into the States means the application of due process for trials that lack enough evidence to be convincing and the impossible task of finding a place to house them in the mean time – however the administration has resolved not to leave them at Gitmo or to use secret prisons, so they have to do something with these prisoners that isn’t sending them back to Yemen. (Or, if there isn't a case to be made, the law is the law and they have to send them back to Yemen as tough as it is to swallow.) My complaint about the lack of a decisive and coherent approach reflects my frustration that administration has continued to apply this dubious definition of international laws of war rather than a more domestic definition of criminal law, thus opening possibilities such as the continuation of the prison at Gitmo, a continuation of the dubiously legal military tribunals, etc. However, it’s tough stuff. They didn’t pull these folks in so they’re left working with, and probably not enough around, the system the Bush administration gave them… in conclusion, I’m pretty glad I’m not sitting behind the desk in the Oval Office these days.
ANYWAYS, that’s just a couple of thoughts. I have plenty more, if you want to know just ask.
One party Congress? I was pretty stoked for Specter’s switch if only as some sort of shameful vengeance for my frustration with him during the Bush SCOTUS nominee confirmation process. But contrary to my well-known partisanship, it bums me out that Republicans are such an irrelevant party. For the moment I am happy to have a basically filibuster-proof majority in the Senate (oh MN!) because it’s about time the government got some serious shit done – thank you Republican Congresses for putting off healthcare and immigration reform, exacerbating the problem of global warming by doing nothing about it, etc. – but I would generally be happier if there was a more two-sided debate occurring on the Hill. In the most Mill of thought processes, I genuinely believe that public policy is of a higher quality when both sides shape the process and (Burke) curb each others excesses. Although I strongly disagreed with the arbitrary decisions of the “Gang” of moderates, and by no means mean to hold them as the ideal, it would be good to have a well-supported intellectual challenge to the borrow-and-spend policies of the Obama administration, not Club for Growth tea parties and Michael Steele temper tantrums.
About time! One of my favorite refrains about Barack Obama is that he was the first Millennial generation candidate and the first Millennial generation president. I know he is technically too old to be a member of my generation but I strongly believe that he resonated with the youth so much this fall because his political philosophy mirrors that of my generation. Examples of this abound but I will cherry pick three particular policies which confirm my expectation.
First, I am thrilled about the Ted Kennedy Serve America Act. The law triples the size of AmeriCorps and increases available education subsidies for said volunteers, a worthy example of presidential leadership – and a stark contrast to Bush’s post 9/11 request that we “go shopping…” At the bill signing ceremony, President Obama prominently acknowledged my generation’s commitment to national service:
It’s the same spirit of service I’ve seen across this country. I’ve met countless people of all ages and walks of life who want nothing more than to do their part. I’ve seen a rising generation of young people work and volunteer and turn out in record numbers. They’re a generation that came of age amidst the horrors of 9/11 and Katrina, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, an economic crisis without precedent. And yet, despite all this -- or more likely because of it -- they’ve become a generation of activists possessed with that most American of ideas, that people who love their country can change it.
On some level I know that choosing this as my first example is kind of pathetic, a bipartisan pat-yourself-on-the-back bill that is about as controversial as loving puppies, but the truth is that I see a bill like this as a true act of leadership, a demand for Americans to serve each other at a time when we’re feeling alienated, scared, and expecting our government to serve us.
Second, thank you White House for fighting the good fight for students. It’s about time that student loan reform was a political issue. The plan ends the system of middle men, terminating private student lending and makes all loans directly through the government. It also adds a bunch more money for Pell Grants and Perkins Loans. I don’t think the plan is perfect – I continue to be concerned about the insufficiency of increases to financial aid in assisting middle income families – but man is it a step up from the predatory system of student loans currently in practice. I wish everyone, or namely just my favorite Senator Bill Nelson and his Nelnet buddies in Omaha, had the sense to see how good of an idea this is.
Third, the changes in the administration’s policy towards Cuba are a harbinger of good to come. They’re not extensive but they are at the very least an extremely meaningful act of political symbolism and, from all indications, step one in a series of new steps US-Cuba and inter-hemisphere relations. OAS leaders seemed also to think so. This definitely fits my generation's post Cold War attitude.
Hardest job in America. I definitely don’t think the administration has been doing an absolutely complaint-free perfect job. Governing, especially now, is tough stuff. To take one example, I’ve been frustrated not to see a decisive, coherent approach to Guantanamo. (Note what I am NOT saying here.) The Bush administration really cornered those who have come after, saddling the Obama administration with a furious collection of radicalized prisoners under dubious self-made constructions of laws of war. I do believe Obama’s people are stuck between a rock and a hard place – bringing the prisoners into the States means the application of due process for trials that lack enough evidence to be convincing and the impossible task of finding a place to house them in the mean time – however the administration has resolved not to leave them at Gitmo or to use secret prisons, so they have to do something with these prisoners that isn’t sending them back to Yemen. (Or, if there isn't a case to be made, the law is the law and they have to send them back to Yemen as tough as it is to swallow.) My complaint about the lack of a decisive and coherent approach reflects my frustration that administration has continued to apply this dubious definition of international laws of war rather than a more domestic definition of criminal law, thus opening possibilities such as the continuation of the prison at Gitmo, a continuation of the dubiously legal military tribunals, etc. However, it’s tough stuff. They didn’t pull these folks in so they’re left working with, and probably not enough around, the system the Bush administration gave them… in conclusion, I’m pretty glad I’m not sitting behind the desk in the Oval Office these days.
ANYWAYS, that’s just a couple of thoughts. I have plenty more, if you want to know just ask.
Monday, February 16, 2009
my generational debt? my priorities!
Malkin’s views are apparently beginning to hold sway with Republicans in Congress. On January 29, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) said of the proposed stimulus package, “This bill is a generational theft bill.” In a blog post yesterday for AmericaSpeakOn.org, a new conservative 501(c)4 group, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) used Malkin’s language as well:
The hundreds of billions of dollars
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), who has become a top critic of the recovery package in the Senate, also referred to it as “generational theft” on CBS’ Face The Nation.
WAIT. HOLD UP. The same Congressional Republicans complaining about a stimulus package that costs less than the Bush administration’s $2 trillion in tax cuts or the over $1 trillion spent in Iraq are just now talking about “generational theft?” These same folks who are gutting the sensible long-term priorities within the bill – that which they’ve described as “Democratic pet projects” – are complaining about the debt that they’re not inheriting? If this is my generational debt, a claim I could work with considering it's going to be my debt, that's a good reason for it not to be loaded with the same bad policies of the last eight years.
I agree with Krugman’s assessment that this talk is “deranged.” (Krugman himself is advocating for an even bigger bill and thinks the administration is merely “kicking the can down the road.”) Ron Brownstein is on MtP is also ripping into this, asking what credibility Republicans have to claim the upper hand on fiscal stewardship. Watch it here.
As usual, Michael Connery at Future Majority beat me to the punch.
The facts of the matter are simple. We're facing the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, and the question on the minds of most economists isn't "how big will the deficits be," rather, it's "will the stimulus be big enough to plug the gaping holes in our economy." The economic recovery package isn't $800 billion in pork or wasteful spending, rather it is a stop-gap to save jobs, and a mid- to long-term investment in the future our citizens, our infrastructure, and our economy.
In its final form, the stimulus package will:
- Modernize more than 75% of federal buildings and improve the energy efficiency of 2 million American homes, saving consumers and taxpayers billions on our energy bills. The plan will also double American renewable energy-generating capacity over three years.
- Make the immediate investments necessary to ensure that within five years, all of America’s medical records are computerized, reducing medical errors and saving billions in health care costs.
- Equip thousands of schools, community colleges, and public universities with 21st century classrooms, labs, and libraries.
- Expand broadband across America, so that a small business in a rural town can connect and compete with their counterparts anywhere in the world.
- Enact the largest investment in America’s crumbling roads, bridges and transit systems since the creation of the national highway system.
- Invest in high risk-high reward science-based research and innovation, and bring it to market—to invent the technology the world uses, and prevent and cure deadly and costly diseases.
If anyone has called attention to this concept, it’s been Nick Kristof. In this On the Ground blog entry from two-ish weeks ago, Kristof began hammering the idea that the best part of the stimulus package were its investments in education. His column this weekend, too, address this is issue. As he notes, the bill invests $100 billion in education. When the Dept of Ed’s annual budget is merely $59 billion, this is obviously a really big deal. And to me, this suggests a stimulus package with some forward thinking.
FINAL NOTE: Yes, I am in Argentina. I arrived this morning. But after a little suitcase mishap yesterday afternoon, I didn’t get a chance to finish this yesterday so it took first prioritiy. As for Argentina: I took a two hour nap and could probably fall asleep right now.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
a week in review of sorts
I hope to make this, a weekly round-up of my favorite news and commentary, a regular feature to keep myself writing and thinking about politics at home while I'm away. If you're keeping score, anticipate Friday appearances.
- McLatchy has a list of what the Senate cut from the stimulus package. I will be revisiting this but just as a preview: $5.8 billion Health Prevention Activity, $1 billion Head Start/Early Start, and $2 billion broadband.
- Two great articles on SCOTUS this week, one piggybacking the other. First, Adam Litpak of The Times ponders “To Nudge, Shift or Shove the Supreme Court Left” which is summed up beautifully in Litpak’s closer: Mr. Obama’s first Supreme Court nomination will no doubt be an accomplished lawyer whose views are generally to the left of the ideological center. What remains to be seen is what sort of liberal — and what sort of liberalism — he intends to endorse. Cue justice brennannnnnn / dear justice letter now.) Justice Ginsburg, the Court’s most liberal member, just underwent surgery for pancreatic cancer. It seems President Obama might have a Court nominee sooner than expected, cf Reuters.
- LOTS OF DRAMA in the upper echelons of the military/diplomatic world. First, Thomas Ricks scoops that it was Gen. Ray Odierna who pushed first for the troop surge. Second, Gen. Anthony Zinni flips a (very very public) shit because he was offered the post of Ambassador to
- David Plouffe, beer pong champion? The Esquire's profile reveals few campaign secrets or insights on the surface but is still a mighty entertaining read.
- OKAY Jonah Goldberg is a hack. I know. But I couldn’t help but agree with the sentiment behind his scathing indictment of Geithner and Daschle in the LA Times. Like the characters he mocks, I do believe that paying taxes is a patriotic duty and appreciate his righteous indignation. Speaking of hacks, Thomas Friedman on nation-building in
- Finally, how did I miss that Kanye West, Lil Wayne, (9-mo. pregnant) M.I.A. and Jay-Z performed together tonight? Is this on youtube yet?
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Blumenthal to challenge Lieberman?
Blumenthal has been kicking around CT for ages. Party leaders have beseeched him to run for governor too many times and he's always declined. He officially took himself out of the 2010 governor's race this week. (Dan Malloy, whose primary nod I supported in 2006, jumped in today. My love, however, is reserved for affable Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz.)
In 2006, activists begged Blumenthal to run against Lieberman but he refused. Now his true ambition is coming out, courtesy of The Hill: Big surprise, he wants to run for the Senate. Serving as Senator, he said, “would be an honor, and it's always been a career goal." I don't have hard feelings about his decision not to run in '06 but I do think a stronger candidate than Lamont -- excepting the money factor and if perhaps if Lamont hadn't taken a poorly timed vacation -- really could have beaten Lieberman in that race. Blumenthal will be an extremely formidable challenger against an already weak Lieberman. The wildcard is that I'm not solid that Lieberman will run again in 2012, especially with numbers as bad as his are now. And I also wonder if Chris Murphy will roll over and let Blumenthal, the state's most popular Democrat, take the primary. Murphy may be young but I think a lot of folks have eyes on him for a reason, not the least of which was his surprise (and considerable!) defeat of Nancy Johnson in '06. If not Murphy in 2012, expect him to be the favorite on Dodd's eventually open Senate seat. As I said, he's young.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
the inauguration!
First, I should say that I just love DC. I miss it all of the time, seriously. I don't think that there is just one person out there for everyone or just one place that each person should live in but I do feel strongly that DC is the city for me right now.
I loved it even though it was extaordinary and extremely crowded. I did not make it to U St, the gentrifying faster than one can say gentification historically black neighborhood (and one of my favorite areas in the city). In retrospect I definitely should have but I knew BCB would be packed-- I heard that lines were apparently three blocks long due to Mayor Fenty and PEOTUS Obama's appearance -- and although I thought it would have been jammin to hit up Busboys and Poets this week, I didn't really get a chance. But I did get to hang out in many of my old haunts while I was in town. That, needless to say, made me very happy.
Sunday we came into Union Station and it was packed with people, mostly African-American tourists from out of town. Excitement permeated. We ran some errands (aka picked up ball tickets!) which brought me to Mount Vernon Sq for the first time. Previously in my mind it had just been the place where that British tourist was killed during a robbery when he thought it was the location of GW's house slash that stop on the green line that always seemed to extend the already irritatingly long trip out to U St. and Columbia Heights. Nothing is really there but the convention center but it was surprisingly pretty!
Then my friends David and I had some dinner with Bobito at Good Stuff Eatery. OKAY, I totally undersell Capitol Hill. Because I lived in NW for the summer, I really didn't explore this area enough except for one actually very entertaining trip to the Hawk'n'Dove. (I should note that the first time I wrote that sentence, I said it was lame. Sorry Andrea, Helms, and Meems.) As for Good Stuff Eatery, it is Spike from Top Chef's new joint. I thought the roll was excellent and the burger's special sauce was pretty jammin' but it wasn't super special.
Monday morning David and I went to a breakfast at Ballou in Anacostia sponsored by Service Nation. Originally our two Ethiopian (aka haven't left NW) cab drivers didn't know how to get us there but we fortunately ended up bumping into some folks on the Metro and found the shuttle. I saw lots of Tufts people I had met over the summer there, including the ever-amazing Deb Jospin, and witnessed great speeches by MLK Jr III and John Lewis (my love for him knows no bounds). Toby McGuire went on after John Lewis and made a total fool of himself because he was tearing up, hadn't prepared remarks, etc., and it was pretty awkward. Then we went to RFK STADIUM where I proceeded to David to the point of annoying him about BEN-EE OLSEN, Luciano Emilio, Jaime Moreno, the Barra Brava, and DC UNITED info galore. (One of the things I happened to fall in love with about DC last summer was its MLS Soccer team DC United. Hat tip to Helmsy.) My enthusiasm was not contagious. We helped pack care packages to servicemembers in Iraq as part of the the president's call for service.
Afterwards, we went to the Hill to pick up our tickets for the inauguration and no joke there were 1.5ish hour lines at all of the entrances to Cannon. There are four. Ugh. Rather than wait, we asked our respective MC's staff to meet us with the tickets, got some tacos at Taqueria Nacionale (yummmmm, another of my favorite things about DC), and saw the following people enter NBC's satallite studio for hits: PA Gov Ed Rendell, Mayor Mike Bloomberg, John Lewis, and Karl Rove. I seriously think we could have sat there for longer if it weren't so cold and if our excellent Tufts friends hadn't come to meet us.
TUESDAY we woke up at CRAZY OCLOCK aka 4:15 to go to the inauguration. The day had a hilarious start which I will share on a person-to-person basis but not on the blog. The Metro was packed even that early, around 5:30, crazily enough. We got to Fed Center around 6:15, huddled in the cold until staking out an awesome spot on the front left corner of the reflecting pool where I could see his balcony (barely) and a giant teleprompter (hey-ooo). The speech was great and sharing it with such inspired people -- many middle aged African-Americans -- was just awesome. Definitely made all of those hours in the cold worth it.
After the inauguration, getting around the city made me want to die. It was packed, you couldn't cross Constitution because of the parade route, and it was nearly impossible to get to and then around in NW. It took 2.5 hrs to get from 3rd and Constitution NW to 15th and G NW because we kept getting sent in different directions. Finally we made it to the party at NDN where I met the Tufts provost (?) and saw a bunch of Tufts people. Later we went to the youth ball. KANYE PLAYED and the Obamas came, made kissyface (oh man I know!), and were just generally awesome. It was otherwise not that great, though I did laugh a lot at Fall Out Boy who also played. Pete Wentz is officially no more than 5'8, I think probably more like 5'6. He sucks a lot.
On my last day in DC Bobby and I went to Amsterdam Falafel where I participated in another of my favorite DC traditions, french fries with Old Bay Spice, and then I saw Stella, and we talked about religion for hours. This is a subject I am interested in discussing if you catch me on the telephone.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
oh, hello
HEY. This is a new project to keep myself writing and thinking while I am in Argentina. I will post about my trips to Israel, to DC for the inauguration, and maybe even the Boston plans ahead as well.
Although this blog - which I will affectionately dub "che boluda" to myself for the lunfardo slang -- is new, I had previously been blogging at NDN Blog and Red, Brown, and Blue. NDN is a Washington, DC progressive think tank and advocacy group and the amazing organization at which I interned this past summer. RBB was a project of the Tufts admission office to demonstrate the activism occurring on campus, especially during this election cycle. I will just quickly link to my favorite of those blog posts here in case you want to read them. Clearly, they tended to be more political in nature.
NDN Blog
Red, Brown, and Blue
- 10/03: Media, Politics at Tufts, and VP Debate Reflections
- 10/06: In which I disagree with Mike on the bailout, Pt. I
- 10/07: In which I disagree with Mike on the bailout, Pt. I
- 10/14: the critical importance of ground game
- 10/23: Gen Petraeus is the jam
- 11/07: how organizing on campus reflected the real thing
- 11/07: Susan Rice and the Obama security paradigm
As for the old posts liked here, they're good for a taste of my writing and also I just appreciate having these on hand as I might link back to them at some point. I will spice up my blog posts for this much more, reflecting on my travels and politics but also on other things I love like music and food. I will also be linking pictures.
As always, I can be reached via email at shana (dot) hurley (at) gmail.com and, in the same manner, via gchat. Be in touch!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
