are the liberals sad about Obama?

I'd love to -- speaking of which, I'd be interested in hearing about your impression of Obama from your rugged pioneer perspective. If you have shared it yet, I must confess I missed it.

I was politely leaving it to the folk to whom dys initially addressed the question, Thomas. Was reading along with great interest, for a while there!

Dys initially addressed his question to "liberals", without any constraints on their nationalities. You would no doubt qualify as a liberal in the United States. But I don't mean to nag you too much. If you prefer to just keep reading along, with or without interest, that's fine too.

Typically foofesque to believe that people who like to comment on aspects of other nation's politics and behaviour get their information from TV soaps.

Tell me Foofie, as a person whose country has invaded a number of other countries because it claimed the right to do so and didn't like some aspect of their behaviour/politics and has been actively involved in murdering, or trying to murder, other countries' leaders, do you believe Americans also have no right to have thoughts and opinions on any other countries?

Or is that only a problem if people comment on the US?

I would EXPECT other countries to feel free to comment on Australia's shameful joining with the US in the invasion of Iraq, for instance, and believe me, the comments from our region have been full and frank.

Similarly, our region comments frequently and trenchantly on our choices re Prime Minister.

If they do so with the benefit of some research and educated interest, am I supposed to be paranoid, denigrating, and defensive about their right to do so?

Come on Msolga!!! You know that only very politically informed Americans would realise that we are anything but libruls!!!


You are included in the invite.

I mean, I am sure Dys knows that you are no librul, but he wouild love to have you speak, I am sure.

Out with it!!!

I might add that your previous American Ambassador dared to attempt to interfere publicly with an Australian election when a candidate made very trenchant criticisms of Bush.

It was considered highly inappropraite here, as was the behaviour of our PM who similarly commented about who Americans should vote for in your last election...while standing at a podium in Washington with Bush.

Were they both wrong? Or just the Australian? Or were they both right?

um ... I'm not a liberal, Thomas.

But after a mere 100 days of Obama's administration, from the other side of the planet, these (off the top of my head, right?) are the developments which most interest me:
- I've been extremely impressed with Obama's willingness to engage with the Muslim world. It's a helluva an achievement, that they're actually been prepared to hear him out, following the past 8 years of hostilities! I can't think of another world leader who would be taken so seriously right now. Kudos to Obama for trying, anyway. I'll be following closely to see what action backs up the rhetoric, though. With Israel, particularly the West Bank settlements.
- I worry enormously about the US (& its allies - my country being one!) involvement in Afghanistan & also, of course, the extremely unstable situation in Pakistan. I don't know that a "victory" is actually possible in Afghanistan. I fear that Afghanistan has the potential to "undo" Obama, if it looks like becoming a never ending, unwinnable war. I don't believe US allies have the stomach for such a commitment, following the Iraq disaster.
- I'm impressed at Obama's determination to close down Guantanamo, but am extremely disappointed that the US is unwilling to take its share of the unwanted detainees, to make this possible - and is relying on its allies to do so. I realize that this is not entirely Obama's fault, but it seems a pretty outrageous situation, all the same. I think it's a mark of huge respect for Obama, personally, that allied countries are willing to oblige.
- I look at the huge task in front of Obama & the US itself, in attempting to revitalize the economy. I note the fierce criticisms of Obama's approach. Who knows what would work or what won't in such dire circumstances? I suspect he is going to face criticisms when the desired improvements don't happen fast enough. I suspect the next election will be a much tougher one for him as a result. That is, if the conservative side looks much more viable than the last lot!
- Finally (not pretending to be any sort of expert on internal US policy, & not knowing all the logistics) I applaud Obama's commitment toward universal health care in the US. Long over-due. It really appeals to me, the idea of so much more of the health dollar going into the health system, for the care of ordinary people who couldn't afford health cover before, rather that into the insurance company's coffers.

OK, these are just the impressions of an outsider, early in the piece, right?

Thanks MsOlga! Unfortunately, you are writing just as I finally get off to bed. I'll get back to your post tomorrow -- or later today, to be more precise.

Haha, Deb!

Snap!!!

Aw, what!!!!!!

You make me write all that, then go off to bed?!

Your turn now, Deb!

One thing that I LIKED about Obama,
to give credit where it is due,
is his revokation of W 's curtailments of funding for stem cell research.

That was the first thing that W did in the White House on Inauguration Day
when he was inaugurated the first time.

I commented way back:




I agree with you about the reaching out to the Moslem world stuff...and I think it has been greatly appreciated by many Moslems.

The failures re the tribunals, torture photos etc. are sad, in my view....but if he REALLY closes Guantanamo and the CIA "secret" prisons, and truly acts on torture whether committed by Americans or their even less humane hench-people in appalling regimes where US prisoners have been sent to be treated unspeakably, then good on him.

I am encouraged by his apparent attitude on getting tougher with Israel.

I had/have no expectation of great change under him....but considerably better than the awfulness of the Bush years looks to be a possibility.

I think the world can breathe a sigh of relief...but expecting great change is way unrealistic.

if he can improve the dreadful American health system for those poor or unemployed....wow!!!!! I wish I could see him break the powers of the HMOs...their model of care is really threatening us now, too.

Even decent politicians never please anyone all that much...and I think he is reasonably decent in a real way. But, just a smart and humane human being.....I keep seeing the Cheney/Bush years and just being glad he is a better human!! I am reading about Cheney right now.....

Even if he had really progressive intentions, getting stuff done in politics is incredibly difficult, and what is possible always alienates the hell out of your supporters who wanted something bigger....and I think his aims have always been very moderate.

I think it an enormous positive that he really has experienced a world beyond the US, and appears to be capable of seeing that world though less parochial lenses than recent US presidents. He'd have to be the most internationally sophisticated US president in decades, if not ever, would he not???

(I am thinking of JFK, who, for all his faults, really was aware of a world beyond the US, and had spent lots of time outside the country)


"He was a man, take him for all and all..."

I wish him well and hope he does some really good things...for the whole world's sake.

Good lord, what does cowboy up or piss off.

To answer dys question as a liberal democrat, I am disappointed with Obama in the way he seems to be not changing the Bush's policies regarding detainees and their rights and other issues in that line. I think he backed down considerably from what he campaigned on. On all else, no I am not disappointed.

And no, Hillary would have done no better in that respect, in fact I would not be surprised it her and her people's influence in this area which may be partly responsible, I think it was mistake to appoint so many of Clinton's people in the administration in retrospect.

Detainees have no rights.

whatever, waterboy.

Right on rable.

The U.S. never claimed a right to invade any country. It did it based on following UN directives. The U.S. never was involved in any activities against other countries' leaders.

Americans can think what they like relative to other countries.

What is your point?

foofie

you sure remember things differently than Kofi: