A 20-year-old is due in court after police discover plans for a Colchester water fight circulating on BBM and Facebook A man will appear before magistrates in September for attempting to organise a citywide water fight on his mobile phone. The 20-year-old from Colchester, south-east England, was arrested on Friday after Essex police discovered the plans circulating on the BlackBerry Messenger service and Facebook. The unnamed man has been charged with “encouraging or assisting in the commission of an offence” under the 2007 Serious Crime Act, police said. He was arrested the day the water fight was due to take place along with another 20-year-old man. He has been bailed to appear before Colchester magistrates on 1 September. The second man was released without charge. The BlackBerry Messenger service, a closed communications network, was the social network of choice for organising many of the raids on shops and businesses during the riots across parts of England last week. A police spokesman declined to disclose whether Essex police had been monitoring the messenger service since the riots. “Essex police use appropriate measures for whatever the crime and wherever our investigations lead us,” he said. Speaking during last Thursday’s parliamentary debate on the riots, David Cameron said he would investigate whether social-networking sites should be shut down if they helped to “plot” crime. The prime minister said he would “look at whether it would be right to stop people communicating via these websites and services when we know they are plotting violence, disorder and criminality”. He has received support from some Tory backbenchers, including Louise Mensch, who likened such a ban to closing a stretch of rail network after an accident. In 2008 there was a spate of mass water fights in UK towns and cities that were organised through social networking . Most remained peaceful. This month a water fight attended by thousands of young Iranians attracted the attention of Tehran’s morality police and led to a series of arrests. Social networking BlackBerry Facebook Police Mobile phones Internet Shiv Malik guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Cristina Fernández de Kirchner achieves 50% of votes, 38 percentage points ahead of her nearest rival, Raúl Alfonsín Argentina’s president, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, has taken a major step towards re-election in the country’s first national primary. With more than 96% of the ballots counted, Kirchner had just over 50%, the government election authority said. She was nearly 38 percentage points ahead of the closest candidate, the centrist Radical Civic Union party congressman Raúl Alfonsín. The former president Eduardo Duhalde, of a conservative faction of the Peronist party, was third, also with 12%. Sunday’s primary elections were a nationwide opinion poll because most parties had already chosen their candidates and voters could cast ballots for any party’s candidate. To avoid a runoff, the winning candidate in the October elections must get at least 45% of the vote, or 40% with a lead of at least 10 points over the closest contender. The results showed Kirchner had no real competitor. Her two main opponents, Alfonsín and Duhalde, fared worse than expected, and the electoral law prohibits them from joining forces and forming a new alliance. If Kirchner gets a similar result in the first round of voting on 23 October, she will win a third term for her centre-left faction of the Peronists. Kirchner succeeded her husband, Néstor Kirchner, in 2007. Her victory was widely attributed to popular support for her husband, whom many Argentinians credited with reviving the county’s economy after its collapse in 2001, when Argentina suffered an acute financial crisis and defaulted on its sovereign debt. In 2008 her popularity rating fell below 30% after a four-month tax revolt by farmers, an important force in the country. But strong economic growth since then has helped to create jobs, increase wages and allow the government to extend welfare programmes. The death of her husband in October 2010 pushed her popularity ratings up again. Argentina Cristina Kirchner guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Google to acquire US mobile company’s smartphone business to ‘supercharge the Android ecosystem’ Google is to acquire Motorola Mobility, the US mobile company’s smartphone business, in a $12.5bn (£7.6bn) cash deal. The takeover will boost Google’s increasing dominance in the nascent smartphone and tablet computer market. The $40 a share deal is a 63% premium on Motorola Mobility’s closing price on the New York Stock Exchange on Friday. Larry Page, Google chief executive, said: “Motorola Mobility’s total commitment to Android has created a natural fit for our two companies. Together, we will create amazing user experiences that supercharge the entire Android ecosystem for the benefit of consumers, partners and developers. I look forward to welcoming Motorolans to our family of Googlers.” Sanjay Jha, chief executive of Motorola Mobility, added: “This transaction offers significant value for Motorola Mobility’s stockholders and provides compelling new opportunities for our employees, customers, and partners around the world. “We have shared a productive partnership with Google to advance the Android platform, and now through this combination we will be able to do even more to innovate and deliver outstanding mobility solutions across our mobile devices and home businesses.” The deal represents Google’s biggest challenge yet to Apple, which has led the way in the smartphone and tablet markets with the iPhone and iPad. Other manufacturers, including Samsung and HTC, will be free to release phones using Google’s Android software. Google will run Motorola Mobility as a separate business. The takeover also pits Google, which has traditionally avoided involvement in hardware, against the manufacturing giant Nokia. The move comes just six months after the Finnish phone maker signed a strategic deal with Microsoft in an effort to rebuild its ailing fortunes. Motorola was the first mobile maker to partner with Google and release phones based on its Android operating system. Motorola spun off Mobility as a separate business in January this year. The manufacturing division primarily produces smartphones, such as the Motorola Droid and the Defy, but also makes tablet computers and digital set-top boxes. Analysts have long predicted that half of the world’s smartphones will be using Android software by the end of 2012, as manufacturers have rushed to adopt Google’s operating system rather than develop their own. The deal is subject to US regulatory approval, which could prove a larger hurdle than usual given that Google’s Android division is already being probed by anti-trust investigators. The companies said they expect the takeover to be completed in late 2011 or early 2012. Andy Rubin, senior vice president of mobile at Google, said: “We expect that this combination will enable us to break new ground for the Android ecosystem. “However, our vision for Android is unchanged and Google remains firmly committed to Android as an open platform and a vibrant open source community. We will continue to work with all of our valued Android partners to develop and distribute innovative Android-powered devices.” Google Mobile phones Telecoms Telecommunications industry Android Software Smartphones Digital media Media business Josh Halliday guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Series of deadly explosions rip through cities across the country, ending period of relative calm during holy month of Ramadan Bomb blasts ripped through more than a dozen Iraqi cities on Monday morning, killing 56 people in a wave of violence that shattered what had been a relatively peaceful holy month of Ramadan. The violence struck from the northern city of Kirkuk to Baghdad and the southern Shia cities of Najaf, Kut and Karbala. The devices used included a combination of parked car bombs, roadside bombs and a suicide bomber driving a vehicle that rammed into a police station. The scale of the violence – seven explosions occurred in several towns in Diyala province alone – highlight the ability of insurgents to carry out attacks despite repeated crackdowns by Iraqi and US forces. Thirty-five people were killed in the southern city of Kut, 100 miles south-east of Baghdad, where construction workers were gathered in a market selling appliances. A police spokesman, Lieutenant Colonel Dhurgam Mohammed Hassan, said the first bomb went off in a freezer. Then as rescuers and onlookers gathered, a parked car bomb exploded. Officials said 64 were injured in the blasts. In Diyala province, seven bombs struck in the capital of Baquba and towns nearby. Five soldiers were killed in Baquba; six people were killed in other attacks around the province. Just outside the holy city of Najaf, a suicide car bomber ploughed into a checkpoint outside a police building. Officers opened fire on the vehicle when the driver refused to stop and the vehicle exploded. Four people were killed and 32 injured in the blast. Among the dead were two policemen. Outside Karbala, a parked car bomb targeting a police station was reported to have killed three officers and injured 14 others. In Tikrit two men wearing explosive belts drove into a heavily guarded government compound wearing military uniforms. The men parked their vehicle and then walked to a building housing the anti-terrorism police. When the men approached the guards ordered them to stop and then opened fire. One bomber was immediately killed but the other managed to get inside the building before blowing himself up and killing three people. Ten people were also injured in the attack. In Kirkuk, one person was killed when a motorbike bomb exploded. Thirty minutes earlier in the city a car bomb blew up outside a police patrol, injuring four officers. Some 30 minutes later one person was killed when a motorbike bomb exploded. Late on Sunday, four blasts damaged a Syrian Orthodox church in Kirkuk. In Baghdad, eight were wounded when a parked car bomb exploded near a convoy carrying officials from the ministry of higher education. The blasts were the first major act of violence since Iraq’s political leaders announced this month that they would begin negotiations with the US over whether to keep a small number of American forces in the country past 31 December. The last such single bombing spree occurred on 5 July, when 37 people were killed in an explosion in Taji, north of Baghdad. US forces plan to leave the country by the end of this year but officials from both sides have expressed concern about the ability of Iraqi forces to protect the country. Iraq Middle East guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Rolling coverage as the PM and Labour leader make speeches setting out their competing analyses of the riots and looting 9.41am: “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste,” Rahm Emanuel, Barack Obama’s former chief of staff, famously said (as you can watch for yourself on YouTube ). And today David Cameron and Ed Miliband are going to embrace the Emanuel spirit by delivering big speeches on the riots designed to reap some political capital from last week’s mayhem on the streets. As an opposition leader Cameron argued that parts of society were “broken” and that Britain needed some big society-led moral renewal. Today he’s going to revive that campaign, arguing that the riots were a “wake-up call”. Miliband has also been calling some kind of ethical renaissance, centred around the theme of responsibility. He has accused bankers, MPs and journalists of all failing to act responsibly (see, for example, the speech he gave during the phone-hacking crisis ) and today he will link this kind of professional immorality with the behaviour the rioters. For both leaders, these are arguments that go to the core of why they’re in politics. Matthew D’Ancona interviewed Cameron in the Sunday Telegraph yesterday and D’Ancona said he had never seen Cameron “so animated, so consumed by a sense of urgency”. Toby Helm accompanied Miliband on a trip to Tottenham for the Observer and he said that Miliband could not walk more than a few paces without residents “grabbing his arm and pouring out their hearts”. Last week Cameron and Miliband largely avoided partisan comments on the riots, instead focusing on condemnation and on the importance of order being restored. But now ideology and party politics are back in business. Cameron is due to speak at 10am and Miliband at 10.30am. We’ve already got a story up containing extracts from their speeches , but I’ll be covering both of them live and providing a full analysis afterwards. Last week Nick Robinson (and others) predicted that that the riots were going to dominate the leaders’ speeches at the party conferences. Those speeches are often the most important in the political calendar. Today it will be as if we’re getting a preview. UK riots Ed Miliband David Cameron Crime Police Metropolitan police Andrew Sparrow guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …The former president of Egypt, Hosni Mubarak, is back in court today to face charges of corruption and unlawful killing of protesters. Plus updates from the rest of the Middle East, including Syria and Libya اقرا باللغة العربية 9.42am: Judge Ahmed Refaat has entered the courtroom in Cairo. He began by asking the defendants to confirm their presence, including the Mubaraks, all three of whom answered: “I am present.” 9.36am: A quick update from Syria , while we wait for proceedings to begin at at the Mubarak trial in Egypt. Activists and residents are reporting a fresh outbreak of heavy gunfire in parts of the Syrian port city of Latakia where military operations are now in their third day, the Associated Press reports: The activists say loud explosions and gunfire have been heard throughout the night and early Monday in Latakia’s al-Ramel district and nearby areas as residents continue to flee. Activist groups said that at least 25 people died in operations in the Mediterranean city on Sunday when gunboats joined ground troops to crush the uprising against President Bashar Assad’s regime. Activists on Monday also say troops backed by tanks entered the town of Houla, near flashpoint central city of Homs. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights says the military is carrying out raids and arrests there. Al Jazeera’s Nisreen El-Shamayleh, reporting from Ramtha on the Syria-Jordan border, also has details of the assault on Latakia : We understand from the local coordinating committee that around 6am local time [4am BST] some women and children in the al-Ramel neighborhood were trying to flee to the nearby neighborhood of al Tamra. Syrian forces verbally allowed them to pass through, but then opened fire on the families. One man was killed and several women and children were injured. We also understand additional military reinforcement has been deployed around al-Ramel neighborhood, which is forcing many residents to try to free. 9.23am: The court is now in session. Mubarak has been wheeled into the cage which serves as the dock in Egyptian courts. His sons Gamal and Alaa are also in the dock. _ 9.13am: The former Egyptian dictator, Hosni Mubarak, has just been wheeled into court on a hospital trolley. Al-Jazeera’s Evan Hill just tweeted this, suggesting the arrival of the former Egyptian president is imminent: Mubarak’s heavily guarded ambulance appears to be approaching the court house for day two of #mubaraktrial. 9.00am: Mohamed El Dahshan, reporting from Cairo for the Guardian, says the main questions being asked in relation to the trial of the former Egyptian president are: Will Mubarak attend? His chief lawyer, Fareed El Deeb, declared yesterday morning that he would, but that there was no guarantee a last minute “medical emergency” wouldn’t prevent him. Will he be on a stretcher as he was on 3 August? Will he be speaking or answering any potential questions from the judge? A section of the courtroom (itself a university lecture hall) has been partitioned off for Mubarak’s family. Right now there are policemen in plain clothes sitting there, but we’re waiting to see whether former first lady Suzanne Mubarak will attend. 8.46am: There are reports of clashes between supporters and opponents of Mubarak outside the courtroom with people throwing stones at each other, as they did when the former Egyptian dictator made his first appearance in court. This picture shows people standing beside a pile of rocks. And al-Jazeera Arabic’s crew have reportedly been attacked by pro-Mubarak protesters . 8.38am: If Muhammad Tantawi, the commander-in-chief of the Egyptian forces and de facto acting head of state, is called as witness in the Mubarak trial, his testimony could be key to either incriminating or exonerating the former Egyptian president, lawyers believe. Tantawi was Mubarak’s defence minister. One member of the defence team, who asked not to be named, told Reuters: Tantawi’s testimony would help the court determine whether Mubarak gave orders to interior minister Habib al-Adli to fire at protesters or whether Adli was acting independently …It is important for the court to meet the requests of the defence team, especially the request to hear the accounts of Field Marshal Tantawi in court to determine whether Mubarak asked him to confront and fire at protesters or not. Another lawyer handling the case said: The defence team sees Tantawi as a compurgator, or a witness whose testimony would exonerate Mubarak. The plaintiffs’ lawyers, however, expect him to testify that he received orders to fire, which is necessary to convict Mubarak. Judge Ahmed Refaat is expected to rule today on whether Tantawi should be called as a witness. 8.05am: People outside the courthouse in the Egyptian capital where Mubarak will appear are chanting, pressing for a quick trial – the former dictator’s lawyers seems to be trying to stretch out the legal process by asking for some 1,600 witnesses to be called – and waving shoes in the air, says al-Jazeera’s Rawya Rageh . But she says there are also pro-Mubarak supporters with t-shirts, reading: I’m Egyptian, I refuse the humiliation of the nation’s leader. The first time Mubarak appeared in court there were running battles between people supporting the former president and anti-Mubarak factions but this time it seems that security has been beefed up. A picture appears to show that extra efforts have been made to separate them . 7.55am: While Mubarak’s trial has been a positive development for Egyptians who fear that too little has changed since the country’s revolution there was worrying news on Sunday when a prominent activist was arrested and charged with slandering and inciting violence against the country’s ruling generals through social networking sites, according to lawyers. Lawyer Ali Atef said the case of Asmaa Mahfouz, one of the faces of Egypt’s revolution , was “a warning” to other activists against criticizing the military. He said: It was a terrifying (interrogation) session. When people are slapped with these charges because they expressed their opinion, this is grave. It is a warning aimed at all activists, bloggers and ordinary people. Mahfouz was released Sunday on bail after more than four hours of interrogation. Atef said activists collected money to pay the bail and ensure her release pending trial. The incitement charges could carry a sentence of more than 10 years. A trial date is up to the discretion of the military prosecutor. Atef said the prosecutor cited as evidence Mahfouz’s writing on Facebook and Twitter and a call to a private TV station in which she accused the country’s rulers of planning an attack on protesters. The lawyer said she was quoted as calling the military council as the “council of dogs.” She is accused of inciting violence by criticizing on Twitter the slow procedure of trials, and warning that people may take justice into their own hands. Mahfouz tweeted on 10 August. Bottom line, if the judiciary doesn’t get us our rights, no one should be crossed if there are armed groups, who carry out assassinations, since there is no law and no judiciary. No one should be crossed. Late on Sunday, Mahfouz appeared on a private TV station, saying the interrogation didn’t scare her, but reminded her of old regime ways. She said: The only thing I regret after this (interrogation) is that we didn’t work hard enough in the streets and with the people to explain why we need to continue this revolution … until this country gets what it deserves. Mahfouz is a founding member of the April 6 activist group. 7.40am: Welcome to Middle East live. The toppled Egyptian president, Hosni Mubarak, is due back in court in Cairo. We’ll be providing live updates from the trial as well as covering news elsewhere in the Middle East. Egypt • Mubarak will be back in the dock to answer charges of corruption and the unlawful killing of protesters . The Cairo criminal court will decide whether Muhammad Tantawi, the commander-in-chief of the Egyptian forces and de facto head of state, will be called to testify in Mubarak’s trial, judicial sources have told al-Masry al-Youm . Mubarak’s first appearance in court was memorable for the extraordinary images of the toppled dictator, who ruled Egypt with an iron fist for 30 years, being wheeled into court on a hospital trolley. You can read Jack Shenker’s riveting account of the first day of the trial here . This is a link to the live blog of Mubarak’s first court appearance on 3 August . Here is a full list of defendants and the charges they face . Syria • Syria has used gunboats for the first time to crush the uprising against Bashar al-Assad’s regime . At least 19 people were shot dead in the Syrian port city of Latakia on Sunday morning as the Assad regime’s aggressive military campaign to quell protests during the holy month of Ramadan continued. Machine guns were fired from at least one ship and several armoured vehicles at the neighbourhood of Ramel, according to local residents and activists. Libya • Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi has urged his people to “liberate Libya” from Nato, a day after rebels captured the key town of Zawiya on the road west to Tunisia, severing Tripoli’s main supply route . Gaddafi’s speech on Monday, delivered over a poor quality telephone line and broadcast by state television in audio only, was his first public address since rebel fighters launched their latest offensive, the biggest in months. In what state television said was a live speech, he said: Get ready for the fight … The blood of martyrs is fuel for the battlefield. The capture of Zawiya enables rebels to halt food and fuel supplies from Tunisia to Gaddafi’s stronghold in the capital. • Representatives of Gaddafi’s government were holding talks with rebels at a hotel on the southern Tunisian island of Djerba late on Sunday , a source with direct knowledge of the talks said – though the government spokesman denied it. Middle East Arab and Middle East unrest Egypt Hosni Mubarak Syria Bashar Al-Assad Libya Muammar Gaddafi Yemen Haroon Siddique guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Cameron to attack ‘slow-motion collapse’ of British morals while Miliband will denounce PM’s post-riot proposals as ‘gimmicks’ Britain has undergone a “slow-motion moral collapse”, David Cameron will say today, as the cross-party unity that had marked politicians’ responses to the riots begins to crumble. The prime minister will go head to head with the leader of the opposition as the two make speeches setting out their competing analyses of the riots and looting. The pair make similarly emphatic condemnations of the rioters, but in a speech at his old school in Camden, Ed Miliband, the Labour leader, will denounce Cameron’s ideas to deal with rioters, put forward over the weekend, as “gimmicks”. Miliband will also link the behaviour of the looters and bankers, phone hacking and MPs’ expenses scandals, saying: “It’s not the first time we’ve seen this kind of me-first, take-what-you-can attitude. The bankers who took millions while destroying people’s savings: greedy, selfish, immoral. The MPs who fiddled their expenses: greedy, selfish, immoral. The people who hacked phones to get stories and make money for themselves: greedy, selfish and immoral. Let’s talk about what this does to our culture.” Today, Cameron will push his long-held opinion that parts of Britain are broken, despite opinion polls that show the public believes he has not handled events well. He will say today that government ministers from both parties will audit their portfolios for policies aimed at mending the “broken society”. In the speech, to be delivered outside London, Cameron will say: “Over the next few weeks, I and ministers from across the coalition government will review every aspect of our work to mend our broken society, on schools, welfare, families, parenting, addiction, communities; on the cultural, legal, bureaucratic problems in our society too; from the twisting and misrepresenting of human rights that has undermined personal responsibility, to the obsession with health and safety that has eroded people’s willingness to act according to common sense – and consider whether our plans and programmes are big enough and bold enough to deliver the change that I feel this country now wants to see.” His words suggest again that the government is angling to renegotiate European law, which can overrule domestic legislation, and which they believe has prevented them from devising policies as they would like. “Irresponsibility. Selfishness. Behaving as if your choices have no consequences. Children without fathers. Schools without discipline. Reward without effort. Crime without punishment. Rights without responsibilities. Communities without control. Some of the worst aspects of human nature tolerated, indulged – sometimes even incentivised – by a state and its agencies that in parts have become literally de-moralised.” He will say he believes that the public are “crying out” for the government to act in this way, and that “I will not be found wanting”. His passion to mend broken society is, he will say, “stronger today than ever”. Miliband, thought to be speaking at the same time, will be at Haverstock comprehensive, in Chalk Farm, north London. The route Miliband would walk to school was hit by rioters last week. Miliband will reflect on ideas floated over the weekend by Iain Duncan Smith, the secretary of state for work and pensions, who has been appointed to lead a gangs task force. Duncan Smith said the government would begin “harassing” gang leaders, suggesting dusk-till-dawn curfews, daily visits and a trawl of their lives and finances to pick up minor infringements. Gang members possibly should, Duncan Smith suggested, receive a knock on the door once a day from the police and arms of government such as the TV licensing offices, tax authorities and DVLA. Children out late at night would be offered places at newly created young offenders’ academies to “take the anger out of their lives”. Miliband is pushing for a national inquiry. He will say: “A new policy a day, knee-jerk gimmicks unveiled without being properly thought through, are unlikely to solve the problem.” The Labour leader will also taunt the prime minister, saying that when Cameron was developing his analysis of “broken Britain” in opposition he acknowledged that deprivation mattered as much as culture in explaining antisocial behaviour. Miliband will say: “I don’t understand why he has changed his mind. The world hasn’t changed. Maybe it isn’t his view of the world that has changed, but his view of what would make him popular that has changed. I am clear: both culture and deprivation matter. To explain is not to excuse. But to refuse to explain is to condemn to repeat.” Duncan Smith, meanwhile, publicly criticised Boris Johnson, the mayor of London, for failing to grasp that London’s main crime problem is gang culture, not knife crime. Johnson, however, told Sky News yesterday that he wanted an increase in police numbers, saying he was “obsessed” with his cause. He told Sky: “The case I make to the Government, and I’m going to continue to make, is that numbers matter, and I think that the numbers we have got on the streets in London now they’re up on when I came in [as mayor].” Though official line of the Lib Dems was steadfast in support of the new agenda, with a spokesman saying Lib Dem justice minister Lord McNally was likely to be appointed to work on Iain Duncan Smith’s gangs taskforce, and saying they did not rule out some of Duncan Smith’s proposals floated over the weekend. UK riots David Cameron Ed Miliband Labour Conservatives Liberal-Conservative coalition Allegra Stratton guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Liberals need to grow up and stop criticizing President Obama. So said Fareed Zakaria Sunday on the CNN program bearing his name (video follows with transcript and commentary): FAREED ZAKARIA, HOST: Over the last week, liberal politicians and commentators in America took to the air waves and OpEd pages to criticize the debt deal that Congress reached. But their ire was directed not at the Tea Party or even the Republicans, but rather at Barack Obama, who, they concluded, had failed as a president because of his persistent tendency to compromise. This has been a running theme ever since Obama took office. Exactly what news outlets does Zakaria frequent if he believes the ire of liberal politicians and commentators last week “was directed not at the Tea Party or even the Republicans?” From the moment stocks began declining after the debt ceiling was raised, the blame has all gone to the Tea Party and the GOP. Did Zakaria somehow miss all the left-wing talk about the Tea Party Downgrade? Is this man completely oblivious to what happens around him, or does he believe much like New York Times columnist Paul Krugman that there should have been absolutely no reporting of conservative views concerning the debt ceiling? Whatever the answer, Zakaria started his opening op-ed with a deeply flawed premise, and it was all downhill from there: ZAKARIA: I think that liberals need to grow up. As “The New Republic's” Jonathan Chait brilliantly points out, there is a recurring liberal fantasy that if only the president of the United States would give a stirring speech, he would sweep the country along with the sheer power of his poetry and enact his agenda. In this view, write Chait, every known impediment to the legislative process – special interest lobbying, the filibuster, macro economic conditions, not to mention certain settled beliefs of public policy – are but tiny stick huts trembling in the face of the atomic bomb of the presidential speech. This does happen if you're watching the movie “The American President,” but not if you're actually watching what goes on in Washington. Maybe this “recurring liberal fantasy” was fostered by folks like Zakaria that presented Barack Obama to the American people as a messiah. If the public has a Hollywood-like view of this president, it's because the media put him on a pedestal like nobody before him. It is therefore quite hypocritical of Zakaria to scold citizens for behaving exactly the way he and his colleagues trained them to: ZAKARIA: The disappointment over the debt deal is just the latest episode of liberal bewilderment about Obama. “I have no idea what Barack Obama believes on virtually any issue,” Drew Westen writes in “The New York Times.” Confused over Obama's tendency to take balanced positions, Westen hints that his professional experience, which is as a psychologist, suggests deep traumatic causes for Obama's pathology. Let me offer a simpler explanation. Obama is a centrist and a pragmatist who understands that in a country divided over core issues, you cannot make the best the enemy of the good. Obama passed a large stimulus package within weeks of taking office. Liberals feel it should have been bigger. But, remember, despite a Democratic House and Senate, it just passed by one vote. He signed into law an unprecedented expansion of regulations in the financial services industry, though it isn't one that broke up the large banks. He enacted universal health care through a complex program that was modeled after the Republican Mitt Romney's plan in Massachusetts. And he's advocated a balanced approach to deficit reduction that combines tax increases with spending cuts. Now, maybe he just believes in all these things. Maybe he understands that with a budget deficit that is 10 percent of GDP, the second highest in the industrialized world, and a debt that will rise to almost 100 percent of GDP in a few years, we cannot cavalierly spend another few trillion hoping that it will jump start the economy. Maybe he believes that while American banks need better regulations, America also needs a vibrant banking system and that, in a globalized economy, constraining American banks alone will only ensure that the world's largest global financial institutions will be British, German, Swiss and Chinese. He might understand that Larry Summers and Tim Geithner are smart people, who, in long careers in public service, got some things wrong, but also many things right. Perhaps he understands that getting entitlement costs under control is, in fact, a crucial part of stabilizing our long-term fiscal situation and that you do need both tax increases and spending cuts – cuts, by the way, that are smaller than they appear because they all start from the 2010 budget, which was boosted by the stimulus. Is all this dangerous weakness, incoherence, appeasement? Or is it just common sense? Or is this an extremely unqualified individual who is way over his head and should never have been given the adulation and sycophantic praise he's received from so-called journalists as well as those in the entertainment media since the moment he tossed his hat into the presidential ring back in 2007? No matter what the answer, it is fairly clear that Zakaria is not likely to become an Obama critic regardless of what happens to the economy, the debt, or the nation's credit rating. That's all the Tea Party and Republicans' fault because “Obama is a centrist and a pragmatist” possessing “common sense.” The good news for Zakaria is this intransigence represents job security.
Continue reading …Click here to view this media (h/t Karoli) Now, don’t get me wrong: I actually kind of like Fareed Zakaria’s take most of the time. I like that he offers up a global perspective, because I think there’s little to be gained by closing our eyes to our place within the community of nations. He’s looked at issues at a deeper level than most Sunday shows and brought in dissenting voices. But boy, do I think he’s off on this one. On a Charlie Rose show earlier in the week, author and psychologist Drew Westen (based on his NYTimes Op-Ed ) gave a fairly common and impassioned argument within the progressive community of President Obama’s performance so far : Drew Westen: I guess I’ll start by saying just from that clip that you just played, which I hadn’t heard before but I think it’s a prime example is that the President blamed the problem on Congress. He didn’t say – and he blamed the problem on the lack of quote/unquote “Congress” to – to be able to – to negotiate in good faith and to compromise. The problem is actually isn’t the problem in Congress, it’s the problem that one side of Congress is actually not willing to negotiate and the other side was willing to negotiate away most of its core principles. So that kind of rhetoric may help the President in his re-election efforts, looking like he is the grown-up who’s above the fray. But in fact what he’s just done is actually to take one more shot at his own party, which is trying to be incredibly conciliatory along with him and they’re getting pretty tired of what a lot of them feel is one capitulation after another on core principles. Charlie Rose: And you want him to do what? Drew Westen: I want him to act like a Democrat. No, I take – I take that back. I’d like to him to act like a Republican, which is to have some convictions and stick with it. Stick with them…. ” And while it’s inarguable that Obama has managed to get some big ticket Democratic items, like health care reform, it’s always come at the cost of giving away the most progressive plank before negotiations even begin. Jonathan Chait of The New Republic argued on the same show that Westen is ahistoric and full of nonsense . Zakaria, coming distinctly on the same side as Chait, posits it is that success Obama has realized–compromised though it may be–that means that liberals are being entirely too unreasonable in their expectations. I think that liberals need to grow up. As “The New Republic’s” Jonathan Chait brilliantly points out, there is a recurring liberal fantasy that if only the president of the United States would give a stirring speech, he would sweep the country along with the sheer power of his poetry and enact his agenda. In this view, write Chait, every known impediment to the legislative process – special interest lobbying, the filibuster, macro economic conditions, not to mention certain settled beliefs of public policy – are but tiny stick huts trembling in the face of the atomic bomb of the presidential speech. This does happen if you’re watching the movie “The American President,” but not if you’re actually watching what goes on in Washington. Strawman, party of two? Westen’s Op-Ed did not place that much significance on soaring rhetoric, only to note that the speeches that stirred a nation to get out to vote for Obama has not as yet seemed to match his actual actions. No, liberals aren’t upset that he doesn’t make more heartwarming speeches. Liberals are upset that Obama’s tactics to negotiate in the conditions Zakaria describes is to start out giving the other side more than 50% of what they want and move further to the right from there. But that’s a much harder position to defend, so Chait and Zakaria create a strawman to make liberals look unreasonable. Further, there is no indication–as Zakaria asserts–that Americans are concerned with jobs AND deficit spending . Americans care about their jobs and the economy vis a vis whether they’ll have a job in the foreseeable future . The deficit is a concern of Beltway Villager academics, not average Americans. To be fair, I have my own issues with some of the left’s criticism of Obama too, because it appears to completely ignore the political environment we’re in and how close the votes have been. I also think it’s important to remember what the President can legally do and what is the provenance of Congress. But it’s the dismissive, condescending attitude of Zakaria towards liberal concerns that grates. I don’t think that liberals hoping to see a little more strength and leadership from Obama is childish. I think taking the country to the brink of default is childish. I think intransigence against making the very top income earners pay their fair share is childish. I think feeding into racism by questioning whether the President was born in this country is childish. But wanting the President to not ape and accept right wing memes that have driven the country into the economic wasteland we’re in? There’s nothing childish about it.
Continue reading …