Office of the Independent Blogger

I’ll share a secret with you, my dear reader, so that you may feel more like a Dear Reader than you, perhaps, might have otherwise. I’ve always referred to you as “Dear Reader” not as a superficial greeting but as sincere welcome to my lair. You are a friend, and I treasure your readership, so I’ll tell you something about me. I love espionage. I love the CIA, the Mossad, M16, KGB, Black Bag Operations. I’m not especially secretive in my own personal dealings, and I live a very open life with a great deal of the people that I know, but I love to read about intelligence agencies and activities in the shadows of other people. A good mystery never hurts! I will tell you this, Dear Reader: don’t lie to me because I usually sniff them out, as I am very good at sensing danger and deceit. I’d make an excellent psychologist, detective or secret agent if that were the life I pursued, because I’m a reader of more than books. Don’t worry, however; I respect people’s privacy, as I’ve grown older more than ever, so I will not be bugging your homes!

With all that said, here is a fine article about the slaying of a terrorist lion from Hizbollah. I, for one, found the story fascinating, and those of you who think you understand the Middle East must read several dozen articles just like this one and books on the subject of intelligence and terrorism because you don’t know the half of it until you do.

Breaking news: Clinton hatchet men are after Barack Obama as a plagiarist. Is he? I don’t know if I’d call it that, but that’s what others will and it is what it is. All politicians and speakers refer to works of others and use thousands of words a day; that, occasionally, there’ll be a close similarity is inevitable. I doubt there’s any politician free of any and all plagiarism and besides, there are a million reasons to vote against each and every candidate: “it sounds like he borrowed without asking from someone I never heard of until this controversy!” is not one of those reasons. I couldn’t care less where he got his platitudes from!

Just like I don’t really care that he wasn’t born out of “Selma” and Hillary Clinton wasn’t named after Sir Hillary of Everest. You shouldn’t either, Dear Reader — you should get real and support or criticize these characters on their own merits, not their speechwriter’s, who should, for the record, be fired along with the fact checker. It’s their jobs to prevent these ridiculous embarrassments, not the candidate’s.

And so you know, I likely accidentally plagiarized the title.

Someone else sees the Hillary Clinton-Richard Nixon connection. I’ve drawn it numerous times here on this blog, Dear Reader, and here in my College newspaper. I’m glad other people see it as well. I am not, after all, crazy, although I’d like to think myself a little ahead of the curve and a great reader of people and history, but I’ve got a long way to go.

Made me feel good to read Slate’s piece because a) I love Slate b) I did something to my ankle today and am giving it times to see if it naturally reduces from the size of a beachball (so I needed something “pleasant” as I’m laid up). If I don’t get better soon, I’ll visit a doctor, don’t you worry about that! In the meantime, all I know is, 1) Hillary Clinton is a lot like Richard Nixon, 2) my ankle is not broken (just sprained, badly), and 3) I really like cheese. Makes me feel good because I appreciate sharing a thought. And isn’t that a beautiful moment, Dear Reader? When you and someone else are thinking the same thing? Can communicate without words? Can speak in unison? Maybe Rosenbaum isn’t my soulmate, and in fact he probably isn’t (You are), but we’re both trying to see the world from another angle and I’d like to keep it that way.

You think you have what it takes to be a diplomat? Even now?

Chinese leader Mao Zedong proposed sending 10 million Chinese women to the United States, in talks with top envoy Henry Kissinger in 1973, according to documents released Tuesday. The powerful chairman of the Chinese Communist Party said he believed such emigration could kickstart bilateral trade but could also “harm” the United States with a population explosion similar to China, according to documents released Tuesday by the State Department on US-China ties between 1973 to 1976.

In a long conversation that stretched way past midnight at Mao’s residence on February 17, 1973, the cigar-chomping Chinese leader referred to the dismal trade between the two countries, saying China was a “very poor country” and “what we have in excess is women.” He first suggested sending “thousands” of women but as an afterthought proposed “10 million,” drawing laughter at the meeting, also attended by Chinese premier Zhou Enlai. Kissinger, who was President Richard Nixon’s national security advisor at that time, told Mao that the United States had no “quotas” or “tariffs” for Chinese women, drawing more laughter.

Kissinger then tried to highlight to Mao the threat posed by the Soviet Union and other global concerns as he moved to lay the groundwork for restoring diplomatic ties a year after Nixon’s historic visit to China. But Mao dragged the talks back to the topic of Chinese women.

“Let them go to your place. They will create disasters. That way you can lessen our burdens,” Mao said. “Do you want our Chinese women? We can give you ten million,” he said.

Kissinger noted that Mao was “improving his offer.”

Mao continued, “By doing so we can let them flood your country with disaster and therefore impair your interests. In our country we have too many women, and they have a way of doing things. They give birth to children and our children are too many.”

A shrewd diplomat, Kissinger seemed to turn the tables on Mao, replying, “It is such a novel proposition, we will have to study it.”

The two leaders then spoke briefly about the threat posed by the Soviet Union, with Mao saying he hoped Moscow would attack China and be defeated. But Mao again lamented, “We have so many women in our country that don?t know how to fight.”

The assistant Chinese foreign minister, Wang Haijung, who was at the meeting, then cautioned Mao that if the minutes of the conversation were made public, “it would incur the public wrath.”

Kissinger agreed with Mao that the minutes be scrapped.

But when Kissinger joked that he would raise the issue at his next press conference, Mao said, “I’m not afraid of anything.

“Anyway, God has sent me an invitation,” said the Chinese leader, who coughed badly during the talks. [He] died in September 1976. US-China diplomatic relations were restored in 1979.

Nixon and Kissinger’s work with China is some of the most intriguing, impressive diplomatic work of all-time, right up there with Jefferson’s purchase of the Louisiana territory, covered in Jefferson’s Great Gamble, which is an excellent book. On Nixon’s campaign with China, there are so many different books that I don’t know which to recommend, so I guess I’d urge you to read a good biography of Nixon, like Nixon by Jonathan Aiken, and a good biography of Kissinger, like Kissinger by Walter Isaacson and I’d recommend you read a good book about Mao — who knew, and considered, the negotiations with Nixon’s White House to be his last “Great Act” in his passion play — like, say, Mao by Phillip Short. (Seize the Hour is also a fantastic book as long as you’re reading a later, better edited and corrected edition as it had small errors here and there.)

Here’s a question for the man who knows everything: where on Earth, beyond the Southern part of America and Texas, is George W. Bush popular? The first place is Eastern Europe, where many appreciate Republican values traced back to Ronald Reagan but also where Bush’s Wilsonian, pro-democracy rhetoric is held dear (as it should be). The second is Africa, and this piece was an enlightening read this morning. Here it is.

In a humid rehearsal studio, Liberia’s pop queen is practicing her newest single — a song called “Thank you” to be released for President Bush’s visit here next week. Her head tilted back, Juli Endee pulls the microphone close and belts out, “Thank you, George Bush. [..] Thank you for democracy,” she croons over the electric guitar, shaking her hips wrapped in yellow cloth. “Thank you for the rule of law,” she sings. “Thank you for debt relief.”

Bush is scheduled to head to Africa on Friday for a visit that will bring him to one of the few parts of the globe where people still have a favorable view of America. A recent Pew poll of 47 nations found that America’s popularity is exceptionally high in Africa, where some hold the U.S. in higher regard than Americans do themselves. America’s popularity verges on exuberance in this nation founded in 1847 by freed U.S. slaves. “If you were to take a survey, you would find that there is not one Liberian that doesn’t love George Bush,” effuses pop star Endee, whose songs calling for peace were among the most played during Liberia’s civil war.

The Bush administration has made Africa the centerpiece of its aid strategy. Twelve of the 15 countries receiving funding from the five-year, $15 billion President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief are in Africa. Nine African countries are among the 16 drawing grants from Bush’s Millennium Challenge Corporation, which provides support to nations that have reached benchmarks from stemming corruption to investing in immunizations. Since Bush took office, U.S. development aid to Africa has tripled, funding for HIV programs have vaulted from under $1 billion to over $6 billion per year and garment exports from Africa to America, fueled by special trade deals, increased sevenfold, according to U.S. statistics.

“His Africa policy has taken us by surprise. None of us expected this,” said Tom Kamara, editor-in-chief of the New Democrat, a leading Liberian daily.

Bush’s focus on the continent, analysts said, stems from the realization that it’s no longer just a case of Africa needing America, but of America needing Africa. Today, a fifth of U.S. oil imports come from a single African nation — Nigeria. By the end of the decade, one in five new barrels of oil entering the global market are projected to come from Africa, according to the Council on Foreign Relations. The continent’s vast, ungoverned spaces have been recognized as one of the new frontiers in the war on terror, with al Qaeda claiming responsibility for attacks in northern Africa and a radical Islamic group with alleged links to the terror organization waging a bloody insurgency in Somalia. More than 1,200 U.S. troops are stationed in Djibouti, which hosts the base for an anti-terrorism task force in the Horn of Africa. Last year, the Defense Department announced the creation of a unified U.S. military command for the continent.

“Of course there is a strong element of self-interest in all this,” said Peter Pham, director of the Nelson Institute for International and Public Affairs at James Madison University in Virginia.

The U.S. approach to aid is no longer just about charity, but about helping emerging democracies evolve and secure their borders to prevent them becoming breeding grounds for terror, Pham said. Bush’s Africa itinerary — his second trip to the continent since 2003 — offers examples of countries whose progress toward democracy and economic stability has been rewarded by U.S. aid. Benin, where Bush’s trip will begin Saturday, received a $307 million grant from the Millennium Challenge Corporation two years ago for its commitment to democracy. That commitment was especially apparent that same year when a shortage of government funds for election machinery nearly caused the polls to be canceled. They were saved by voters, who raised cash, lent computers and used their motorcycle headlights to illuminate ballot-counting centers.

Ghana, one of the most stable democracies in West Africa, was the recipient of $547 million 2006 — “the largest grant ever to Ghana,” according to Kwabena Anaman, director of research at Ghana’s Institute of Economic Affairs. “Even though (former) President Clinton was a friend of Africa, I think President Bush has demonstrated evidence of caring in practical terms.” Rwanda, which is recovering from a 1994 genocide, has just qualified to receive funding under the Millennium Challenge program.

The administration’s new approach to dispensing aid has its critics, including some in Africa.

Although the scale of funding under the Millennium Challenge is unprecedented, the program has been slow to take off, with only a fraction of the intended funds reaching the target countries six years after its launch. “They built a great embassy here in Kigali, but if you go out to the countryside you don’t see any signs of the American presence,” said Venuste Karambizi, a dean at Kigali Independent University in Rwanda’s capital.

Others say the set of indicators used to determine good governance are far from foolproof. For example, Bush has been expected to announce a $700 million grant for Tanzania. But last week, days before Bush’s arrival, the prime minister resigned in a corruption scandal. Nathaniel Heller, a former State Department official who now directs Global Integrity, a think tank that focuses on corruption, said international donors mistake Tanzania’s “economic progress for governance progress.”

But in the streets of Monrovia, these criticisms seem petty.

The memory of bodies piling up outside the American embassy in 2003 is still fresh, and so is the sight of U.S. warships on the horizon and Bush’s call for former President Charles Taylor, accused of orchestrating war crimes, to leave. Liberians are also grateful to Bush for the recent cancellation of the country’s debt. Endee, the pop star, has no time to discuss critiques of Bush’s foreign policy. In her studio, she is busy finishing not only her song, but also a welcoming dance. It begins with dancers asking each other, “Have you heard who’s coming to Liberia?”

When one answers, “George Bush is coming to Liberia,” they explode into dance.

The harder I look at the Bush Presidency, the Bush Doctrine, the War in Iraq from beginning to now, and then look to my deepest principles, my Wilsonian heart and think of the female voter at Bush’s State of the Union, the sight of Iraqis voting, the building of new schools, the attempted reformation of a democracy with the goal of ending tyranny in our world — well, the more I support the War in Iraq, and the less-inclined I am to cut our losses in Iraq and leave it to its own devices. If they asked us to leave, prematurely, then that’s their perogative but otherwise we should stay as long as it takes, especially if, as I suspect, it becomes a Japan/Germany type of committment. War won’t rage forever.

I think that as time goes by, people will appreciate Bush’s foreign aid, diplomatic promises, big goals and (hopefully) Iraqi successes just as much as they criticize his domestic policy, although the idea of reforming Social Security might be vindicated by history as well, someday. I’m not ashamed to say that, in a lot of ways, I admire the President, critical though I am of him. I’m not ashamed to say that I can put partisanship aside. You’ve read my before, Dear Reader, and if you haven’t you should go back; I’ve ripped Bush plenty of times, but I think some of it was unfair, a lot of it premature, and I’ve always been a supporter of this War, for better or worse.

Great read on “The Lyin’ Tamer”.

Nothing further to add, really, as I’ve got a lot of studying ahead of me for an exam tomorrow, but I wanted to note that Hillary is still way ahead of Obama in Pennsylvania, Ohio and Texas. Barack Obama has a lot of work ahead of him, as do I, in analyzing poetry and writing a paper (not for poetry) about the 2008 election and all the trends swirling around. That should be up soon enough, but for tonight I’m out.

Solidarity.

No, this isn’t about the Laroucheian proposition that we use moon rocks as fuel — because the Russians will do it if we don’t! This is about Roger Clemens’ appearance before the Congress. I’ll keep it brief. First, I was struck by this New York Times article and would urge voters to throw the bums out! because of this serious violation.

Any members of the House oversight committee or their staff who asked Roger Clemens for an autograph during his tour of the Capitol over the past week might have violated a federal law against soliciting things of value from people with interests before the committee, several lawyers with expertise in Congressional ethics laws said.

In addition, if a staff member or a member of the committee had Clemens autograph a baseball, that would apparently violate a House ethics ban against taking a gift valued at more than $50, the lawyers said.

Clemens’s entourage here said he autographed scores of items Thursday and Friday while visiting 19 of the 40 members of the committee, which is set to take his testimony Wednesday. Clemens and his lawyers were back Tuesday, visiting more committee members in advance of the public hearing.

Without sarcasm, allow me to suggest that it was inappropriate and disgusting for Congressman to be fawning over him before the hearing, in addition to the little matter of this whole saga probably not deserving such a hearing. But if it is going to be held, can’t it be held with some level of dignity from the Congressman in charge?

To be fair, they’ve done a good job grilling Roger Clemens and he has been shown to be a liar. He’s admitted his wife’s use of human growth hormone and has attempted to pawn off Pettitte’s contradictions as misunderstandings, but that is not going to fly. Awhile ago, writing for Baseball Evolution, I noted that Clemens was playing a dangerous game, and now he appears to have lost, whatever Dan Burton, Idiot Congressman, has to say about McNamee.

On a final note, this is a comment left on ABC by a reader:

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if Waxman and the rest of Congress investigated the connection between the fact that Americans pay 50% more for the same prescriptions than the rest of the world and virtually all of Congress, led by Kerry’s $270,000, have accepted huge campaign donations from Big Pharma - even companies losing money are donating hundreds of thousands of dollars. At one point I wondered what would happen if my pension dropped it’s prescription plan and I had to pick up the tab. I looked at Canadian prices and realized that my part of my premiums is equal to the difference in US and Canadian prices for my diabetes medications. So, thanks to our Congress, Big Pharma picks my, and other Americans, pockets - in my case for $113 per month.

I concur.

“In your heart, you know he’s right.” That’s what they used to say about John McCain’s hero, Barry Goldwater back in 1964. Democrats countered, “In your guts you know he’s nuts!” Allen Iverson once said, in response to criticism from his coaches in the media that he didn’t care about practice and missed it: “What are we talking about? We’re talking about practice? Practice? Not the game, not the game, not the game that I live and die for, but practice?! What are we talking about, man?” Senator McCain asks, What’s Obama talking about? “Platitudes?” Platitudes?! Platitudes! When I heard those comments this morning, I must confess to smiling wide and enjoying the show, because Obama does speak in platitudes and offers little in terms of substance. He is a flower-girl politician with wonderful little phrases that ultimately don’t add up to more than rhetoric. If he continues his campaign as if he were Adlai Stevenson or Michael Dukakis, John McCain is going to eat his lunch! Speaking of which, Walter Mondale turned to his opponents in 1984 and asked, “Where’s the beef?” during a debate. How much have things changed since then, when we are talking about platitudes?

I’m feeling emotional tonight. Watching the film Andre after watching Philadelphia, found old pictures and illustrations drawn for me by others that have pulled at my heartstrings, taking care of my cats (one of whom is, temporarily, ill) and helping a few friends with some problems. So finally I find some time for myself this evening, settle down to blog politics and find this.

East Timor athletes training for the Olympics face obstacles that range from a lack of cash to buy even basic equipment to sporadic gang violence and fears of chaos following an assassination attempt against President Jose Ramos-Horta. East Timor was plunged into a fresh crisis on Monday when rebel gunmen shot Ramos-Horta, a 1996 Nobel Peace Prize winner, and riddled Prime Minister Xanana Gusmao’s car with bullets. Ramos-Horta is in serious condition in an Australian hospital, while Gusmao narrowly escaped the gunmen’s bullets.

The violence may further hamper preparations by marathon runners who hope to represent Asia’s youngest nation at the Olympics in August.

East Timor runners training for the Games have already discovered that the road to Beijing is paved with obstacles. “Based on our programme, training should be done every day but sporadic incidents like gangs throwing rocks on the street makes us afraid,” said Antonio Soares Xavier, who was conducting a training session with athletes in the capital Dili.

Factional bloodshed two years ago killed 37 people and drove 150,000 from their homes, with foreign troops needed to restore order and setting back development in what was already one of the world’s poorest nations. A new state of emergency declared after the shooting of Ramos-Horta, gang violence, vandalism and arson still persist. An unemployment rate estimated at about 50 percent has helped fan a gang culture among bored youths.

I hope their athletes make it to the Olympics and their economy makes it to the world forum and their people make it to Peace.

It’s one of those nights where I just wish we could all get along, and so I don’t feel like discussing the Primary results. What was expected to happen has happened but the race is nowhere near over, as John Dickerson and common sense are quick to point out.

Was watching a re-run of Real-Time With Bill Maher and he had the occasionally insufferable occasionally insightful Jonah Goldberg on his show. He mentioned his belief in the government’s recent claim that it’s only use Waterboarding less than a handful of times and none in years. I wrote about that here, noted my skepticism toward that claim (I can hardly fathom that it’s true) but now I want to say, just for the record, that I think their claim is possible and if it is true, then that’s damn good, but I doubt it very much.

Geraldo Rivera wasn’t allowed on CNN recently and now he claims that Fox is being boycotted. Maybe, but maybe they just didn’t want that idiot on their airwaves. He gets far too much air as is.

Articles like this one make you wonder whether or not Hillary has lost the nomination. I doubt it (I think this will, ultimately, be a Dated Dean, Married Kerry type of finish) but we’ll have to wait and see what effect losing seven or eight primaries without winning one will have on Clinton.

On a last note: Yahoo! won’t Yahoo! Microsoft’s attempted bid. Microsoft, with its natural rapist mentality, refuses to accept no for an answer and is going to either sweeten the offer or take it to the streets — the Wall Streets, that is, with an appeal to the shareholders themselves.

The Clinton campaign replaced (read:fired) its campaign manager for an old friend of Hillary’s who went to school with nuns and learned about bitter loyalty there. She’s been called upon by the Senator from New York before, in 1994, when she was attempting to get out of Whitewater without an indictment. I’m not sure this is a significant move for Clinton, because I don’t know how important these races are, but Obama has clearly gained a significant amount of momentum and maybe the campaign is in more trouble than I am willing to guess, because I don’t think there’s anything to panick about with the four losses between today and yesterday in states she likely should’ve lost, except for Maine, but maybe there is cause for panick. I do think there’s cause for concern, and so does Clinton. That is why she’s been trying to get Edwards to endorse her, increasing her efforts this weekend, to try and pull away. It should help her that she has the lead for party insiders.

Wouldn’t it be a great, tragic irony if Hillary Clinton won the nomination based on party insider help? If you don’t know, Bill worked for McGovern at the convention in 1972, to win the nomination which they did despite the opposition of leadership, and now for Clinton to be in a situation where this might happen would be quite the turn of events. Of course it might be a greater irony if she lost it despite their support, and Barack Obama became the new George McGovern! (A very real possibility.)

Oh Jesus.

Mike Huckabee is rejecting suggestions that John McCain is the party’s inevitable nominee and said he won’t quit the presidential race.

The former Arkansas governor told a cheering crowd at the Conservative Political Action Conference meeting in Washington on Saturday that he “didn’t major in math,” but “majored in miracles.”

“Am I quitting? Let’s get that settled right now. No, I’m not,” Huckabee told the crowd.

It is just a short-term ploy, I think, to show McCain that he can be viable and fight a good fight, making this an open, stringless tryout for the Vice Presidency, but it might be the case that Mr. Huckabee truly believes he can win this race. If so, he’s in for a world of hurt but I don’t believe that he is a political moron and I don’t expect him to sink too much money or effort into his now-dead campaign. He’s just playing short-term politics; nothing more, nothing less.

I thought that this was good, from Slate. Everybody promises change, and so Barack Obama is nothing special in that regard. Every cycle, there’s someone promising change who looks or sounds like they can provide it but it’s just a ploy to get elected, and it usually doesn’t work. The American public is, fundamentally, content with their system of government, as I think they should be. By no means are Americans, or I (by extension) thrilled with each and every policy but not too many people want the system thrown out, and even fewer want a candidate who promises little but “change” for its own sake. That’s why McCain and Clinton are better candidates than, say, Huckabee and Obama.

I’ve never been a big fan of McCain, but I like him better than the other Republicans and I hate him more, as well. Why do I hate him? Because Democrats and Independents believe him to be the great hope for Liberal Republicanism (for a Liberal Republican government) when I don’t think that to be the case at all. Now with articles like this cropping up, I say to my fellow Democrats, “You’ll be sorry.” John Bolton as Secretary of State? Oh, have mercy. John McCain is not Progressive, and George W. Bush agrees. He’s not a Paleo-Conservative, but neither is Bush, so I do like him more than the others but I absolutely hate the false hope some hold out for the man.

Romney.

I salute this real man of genius. Spending millions and millions of his own dollars in a race he couldn’t possibly win? Priceless.

Edit: I, generally, don’t like to edit or post immediately upon hearing of a news event and now here I am breaking both (unwritten) laws. What has driven me to civil self-disobedience? Romney’s speech announcing himself a quitter, in which he decides to take shots at Harvard, “liberals”, welfare, atheists, France, unions and “activist judges”. Then he linked porn to single-parent households.

I have never seen a bigger loser in politics than him, and anyone who has attended a poll-watching party with me can attest to that statement. And I can’t remember a concession speech by a major candidate for President that was anywhere near this one in terms of gracelessness and idiocy.