Tuesday, September 24, 2013

The buzz among the politico cognoscenti, and talking heads, is the current New York mag. interview with Hillary.

(..In the world of the Clintons, of course, what constitutes

ordinary


and everyday has never been either. So the question was inevitable:
Given who he is, and who she is, does Bill, among their guffaws over the
dogs and stupid movies, harangue her daily about running for president?
….To this, Hillary Rodham Clinton lets loose one of her loud, head-tilted-back laughs. “I don’t think even he
is, you know, focused on that right now,” she says. “Right now, we’re
trying to just have the best time we can have doin’ what we’re doin’.?”

There’s a weightlessness about Hillary Clinton these days.
She’s in midair, launched from the State Department toward … what? For
the first time since 1992, unencumbered by the demands of a national
political campaign or public office, she is saddled only with
expectations about what she’s going to do next. And she is clearly
enjoying it….”
http://nymag.com/news/features/hillary-clinton-2013-9/
***************

The buzz among the politico cognoscenti, and talking heads, is the current New York mag. interview with Hillary.

Her comments are being interpreted as being open to running for POTUS in 2106.

Sure, such comments make good fodder for our 24/7 news media.
But no ambiguous politico plans beyond the next electoral cycle..in this case, 2014.

Will 2016 be a good year for a Dem. POTUS candidate?
How will the stupid party, now morphed into the crazy party (GOP) evolve? Will it become embers in the tea party bonfire? or will it shed its’ extremism, and move toward the middle?

If Obama burns up, and is as unpopular as Bush 2 in 2008, the Dem. POTUS nomination will not be worth it.

And HIllary’s potential candidacy really depends on her, and Bill’s health, and other personal factors.

Should Hillary run, her polarizing role in Bill’s White House years; and her somewhat mediocre tenure as Sec. of State will be major issues.

(Iran's new president, Hasan Rouhani, is leadings the country's delegation at the annual U.N. General Assembly in New York.) **************

  1. (Iran's new president, Hasan Rouhani, is leadings the country's delegation at the annual U.N. General Assembly in New York.)
    **************

    And that cuddly curmudgeon Newt Gingrich says the POTUS, any US Pres., should only meet with a head of state if there is an agreement to sign, or a treaty to ok. A extemporaneous meet-up would not meet that standard.

    Newt, the historian, surely recalls the JFK and Khrushchev meeting in Vienna in Summer 1961.
    There was little to originally agree to, except a possible Laos neutrality agreement.
    Otherwise, Kh. ranted to the young new POTUS , giving a long tirade on how communism would "bury" capitalism; and how he would sign a separate agreement with East Germany/East Berlin that would block the West from access to W. Berlin.

    After a day of the rambling tirade, JFK had to get a shot from Dr. Feelgood; a concoction of speed and vitamins.

    After two days, JFK put a hat on over his face, sat down, and told James Reston,NYT, how it was the worse two days of his life.

    Well, that wouldn't happen with Obama and Rouhani....different time, different personalities.

    So what would be wrong with meeting informally?
    It would not require a duel press meet after the meeting, but would signal a potential break threw in bringing Iran back into the international community.

    Iran is hurting, economically, with the hard-hitting sanctions.
    Rouhani, with the apparent concurrence of the Allotaha, seems to want a new beginning in relationships.

    Israel is opposed; and the Israeli lobby in DC is very influential.

    Is Rouhani lying in saying Iran does not want a nuke military weapon?

    Can Israel, alone, conduct a quick strike on Iran's nuke facilities, as it did in Syria a couple of years ago?

    It would not be the same walk in the park for Israel.

    Diplomacy is the path to follow; peace is the goal that is necessary.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/09/24/iran-un-talks_n_3981107.html

Tuesday, September 10, 2013

Is there no sense of decency anywhere nowadays?

(MIAMI — Diana Nyad's 110-mile swim from Cuba to Florida has generated positive publicity and adoration for the 64-year-old endurance athlete — along with skepticism from some members of the small community of marathon swimmers who are questioning whether she accomplished the feat honestly.

Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/diana-nyad-swim-cuba-florida-questioned-article-1.1449150#ixzz2eV4fxtoP)
**********

Is there no sense of decency anywhere nowadays?

Is the level of competition in sports at a level that a 64-yr. old lady can't get the plaudits she apparently deserves.

I don't hear that Cuban exiles in Miami are challenging her bona fides.

How many of these exiles would have gladly swam from Castro's Cuba to Miami, without jellyfish protection

A second senior official, who has seen the most recent planning, offered this metaphor to describe such a strike: If Assad is eating Cheerios, we're going to take away his spoon and give him a fork. Will that degrade his ability to eat Cheerios? Yes. Will it deter him? Maybe. But he'll still be able to eat Cheerios..."

(..The strike, as envisioned, would be limited in the number of targets and done within a day or two. It could be completed in one fell swoop with missiles, said one senior official familiar with the weapons involved. A smaller, follow-on strike could be launched if targets aren't sufficiently damaged.

A second senior official, who has seen the most recent planning, offered this metaphor to describe such a strike: If Assad is eating Cheerios, we're going to take away his spoon and give him a fork. Will that degrade his ability to eat Cheerios? Yes. Will it deter him? Maybe. But he'll still be able to eat Cheerios..."
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2013/09/08/syria-tomahawk-missiles-chemical-weapons/2770949/
**********

I'm a supporter of small, locally owned businesses.
A capitalist who can think globally, but buy locally.

So I'm always skeptical of the large, primary sector corporations; and their 24/7 marketing imprints.

Are Cheerios still owned by Kellogg? and is Kellogg owned by General Mills?
CherriOats was the original name for Cheerios, according to the wikipedia.
And who wasn't imprinted with the Cheerio breakfast brand?
Not eating Cheerios was like missing Howdy Doody.

Now, the issue here seems to be that the US military spokesperson assumes Assad eats Cheerios.
Now isn't that the height of consumer , multinational corporate imperialism?
**********
On a more serious note, the Charlie Rose interview with Assad was informative; and useful.
As of this morning, there is talk, movement to see if Assad, Syria, will agree to give up its' chemical wmds.
I would like to see this.