One of the major outcomes of the attacks of 9/11 is the clear contest between forces that believe that the world civilization so based on trust can endure the counter views of the terrorist. The question for me is to what degree do our USA national reputation and organizing principles engender trust and freedom.
Group items tagged
Business Reputation: Creativity and Happiness: Reputation: Building on Trust - 0 views
-
-
Barack (Lets reason together) is clearly for recapturing our lost status and McCain wants to extend the tough guy image of the Bush doctrine (Fear US - USA reserves the right to attack first).
-
This is especially understood - but not excused - in those of my generation and older, both from a black and white perspective. For blacks its owed to us based on time in the country - as if a quota could make such a tactic make sense or even worse is he black enough to get back what racism over these many years has taken from us. On the other end are whites that figure that any black person smart enough to become President must be smart enough to take back from them all the advantages that they have accumulated.
Mark Green: 7 Days in America: Will McCain Put Reputation First at Wednesday's Debate? ... - 0 views
-
I understand how ambition can warp judgment. But your recent personal attacks on Barack Obama are so beyond the pale for presidential politics that you now face a fateful choice by the Wednesday debate -- will you pull back from the abyss of sleazy slander or risk losing not only the election but also your reputation and honor?
-
First, it's wrong and you shouldn't engage in such self-immolating behavior. Second, it's backfiring -- since polls show the gap widening since voters care a lot more about their jobs and 401(k)'s than Bill Ayres. Third, while a loss is a loss, for down-ticket Republicans, an Obama win by 10 points rather than by 4 points can be the difference between 56 and 60 seats in the Senate, between 245 House seats and 260 House seats.
Mark Kleiman: Changing the topic - Politics on The Huffington Post - 0 views
-
Coincidentally, on the very same day the Financial Times reported that UBS had advised 50 current and former employees of its private banking group not to travel to the United States. The bank is worried that they might be arrested in connection with a massive tax-evasion scheme under which UBS helped rich Americans cheat the IRS, thus making sure that the rest of us suckers had to pay for, e.g., the War in Iraq. Some of the clients of the scheme are already testifying before a grand jury, and a senior UBS official has already been indicted. UBS is offering to provide lawyers for all of the suspects. Now, how is it that Gramm got to be Vice-Chairman of UBS? Why, by being the chief author of the banking-deregulation legislation (the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act) that made so many bankers rich and helped create the crisis McCain doesn't want to do anything about. In keeping with McCain's decision to purge "lobbyists" from his campaign, Gramm had himself de-registered as a lobbyist. But he's still Vice Chairman of UBS, and still McCain's chief economic adviser. All the de-listing means is that he can't now personally call Congressmen or Senators; no doubt his staff can handle such details for the next few months.
Cenk Uygur: Worse Than "That One" - 0 views
-
For me, the more worrisome moment of the debate came when McCain told a young, black questioner, "You've probably never heard of Fannie Mae." We were doing play-by-play of the debate on our website and I shouted out, "Why not? Why wouldn't he have heard of Fannie Mae?"
Sarah Palin just called herself an anti-Semite - 0 views
-
Sarah Palin sat in her conservative evangelical church, twice, and said nothing when her visiting pastors and speakers attacked another great nation and another great people - Jews and Israel.
Business Reputation: Creativity and Happiness: Reputation, Recuperaton and Leadership -... - 0 views
-
The argument I’m making here is that McCain has failed to demonstrate that type of leadership. That his investment in a reputation strategy – formed after the Keating 5 case and consistently implemented up to the time of his latest presidential campaign can no longer forestall the widespread Voter exit.
The McCain/Palin Debate Spin: We Won Because She Wasn't a Dithering Idiot - 0 views
-
What Gertrude Stein said about her hometown Oakland could also be said of Sarah Palin. "There is no there, there." Sarah Palin is simply without substance.
-
She even tried to humanize her image, saying that despite her views against same sex marriage she didn't judge people and had a diverse group of friends. However, when moderator Gwen Ifill asked Palin if she was in agreement with Senator Biden, who'd said he was against all forms of discrimination against same sex couples but did not support gay marriage, Palin would only repeat what Biden said about gay marriage. Perhaps because she realized that her key supporters -- the evangelical right wing -- might already be choking on their fried chicken wings because of her attempt to say something pleasant about a group of people they consider an abomination.
-
The only point of that made any sense to me was her agreement with Biden on civil union - even through she could never say the words.
-
McCain's outlines environment proposal - 0 views
Plouffe: Palin Choice a 'Transparent Moment' - The Caucus Blog - NYTimes.com - 0 views
-
In an interview here on Tuesday, Mr. Plouffe said voters should instead judge Mr. McCain for what he called an “impulsive” decision to choose Ms. Palin, who has served as governor of Alaska for 20 months. He said Ms. Palin’s governmental record in Alaska is fair game for examination in the final two months of the campaign, but not her family.
-
The term used by Obama's campaign for McCain's selection of a VP is "impulsive" -
Marcia G. Yerman: Race, Gender and the Media in the 2008 Elections - 0 views
-
Several themes coalesced over the two-day period. A prominent one was the oft repeated, "Did race trump gender?" Dr. Cynthia Neal-Spence, Associate Professor of Sociology at Spelman College, spoke about the dilemma of the black female. Asking, "Are we as a group more gender conscious or race conscious?" she then suggested "the media coverage had helped black women to choose sides." Despite Obama offering a post-racial approach, she sensed the same "tensions resurfacing that were in place during the suffragette movement." She also saw the media's analyzation as being "racialized."
-
Although feminine for Sarah Palin is an asset, "feminine" attributes in general are considered a negative. "The process of gender," as phrased by Vojdik, is a methodology employed by the Republicans where they "feminize" a male candidate -- to his detriment.
-
Frank Rudy Cooper, Associate Professor of Law at Suffolk University, spelled out that "Obama had to deal with the media representation of black masculinity." He posited that Obama had to be "a unisex president." Despite trying to run a "post-racial campaign, Obama had to be careful avoid "the angry black male" stereotype by not being too aggressive. Cooper explained that in pitting McCain against Obama, the masculine vs. feminine style is emphasized. Obama's empathetic style has been criticized, and as "feminization is a slur," he is forced into a precarious balancing act.
- ...2 more annotations...
Search twitter: dialtest - 0 views
-
search twitter: dialtest
Business Reputation: Creativity and Happiness: Say It Ain't So - Sarah - 0 views
-
One would think concern for their reputation would limit, if stop throwing character bombs as Sarah and John have engaged - NO - you would think they would have little or nothing in their background that could offer the opportunity for counter attacks - not so
For better trade, give peace a chance - 0 views
-
Trade's effect on military conflict is one of the most important issues in international relations. The last decade has seen research and debate into the role of trade intensify; Liberals argue that trade brings peace, neo-realists and neo-Marxists reason that trade brings conflict, and classical realists contend that trade has no impact. This debate is not just academic: some key U.S. policymakers (Senator McCain and former President Clinton for instance) believe that trade brings peace, a view that contributes to their support for free trade. Economists developed bilateral trade models in isolation from models of interstate conflict, which were the work of political scientists. These two types of models handle distance between nations differently. Bilateral trade takes its cue from Isaac Newton's formula for the gravitational attraction between two objects: the larger the objects' masses and the shorter the distance between them, the larger the attraction. So the larger the trade partners' economies and the closer they are to one another, the greater their trade. However, conflict models instead incorporate shared borders by land or close distance over water (contiguity) - stressing the role of border disputes in sparking interstate conflict. Distance is included in conflict equations based on the idea that an army gets weaker the farther it strays from its base, but what point in a nation to pick for the trade and conflict equation is unclear. Often theorists use the distance between capital cities, which is problematic: wars generally happen around borders where armies are often based, and capitals have historically changed without this altering the likelihood of war between the nation and its neighbours. The authors suggest that the trade data set plugged into trade and conflict equations is critical. This type of data often contains gaps - there are a number of reasons why data from a particular nation might be unavailable, inevitably leaving researchers to make assumptions. The majority of trade and conflict studies define conflict to include all types of militarised interstate disputes (MIDs). But Keshk, Reuveny, and Pollins question the results generated when different conflict definitions are chosen. For instance, a conflict such as a threat to use nuclear weapons would not cause fatalities, but may still have some impact on trade and vice versa. In fact, by altering the data treatment and assumptions in the equation, the authors generated a variety of results, which supported several different theoretical viewpoints. The authors suggest that future research should investigate questions of missing bilateral trade data, and attempt a more subtle use of the meaning of "military conflict". Researchers might also develop distance and contiguity measures at a more sophisticated level. "Any signal that trade brings peace remains weak and inconsistent, regardless of the way proximity is modelled in the conflict equation. The signal that conflict reduces trade, in contrast, is strong and consistent," say the authors. "Any study of the effect of trade on conflict that ignores the reverse fact is practically guaranteed to produce estimates that contain simultaneity bias." Studies of the relationship between international trade and military conflict can be traced back many centuries, particularly in the works of luminaries such as de Montesquieu, Immanuel Kant, John Hobson, Vladimir Lenin, Henry Morgenthau, Kenneth Waltz, Frederic List, and Albert Hirschman. This latest study emphasises that international politics are affecting trade between nation pairs, while it is far less obvious whether trade systematically affects politics. "To our colleagues from the liberal camp we would like to say that we still believe there are limited circumstances in which more trade may help lead countries to more peaceful resolutions of their differences, particularly if they are already at peace," the authors state. "However, it is past time for academics and policymakers to look beyond the naive claim that the cultivation of trade ties will always and everywhere produce a more peaceful world."
-
Liberal theorists and politicians have long argued that trade leads to peaceful relations between nations - a view that informs the push for free trade. However, many international relations experts dispute this claim. New US research out today, in the journal Conflict Management and Peace Science published by SAGE, finds that rather than trade being the driver, peace is actually the vital ingredient that allows trade to flourish.
Don't Blame Obama, America Did It To Itself - 0 views
-
Obama is neither liberal nor conservative, he's a middle of the roader. It sure would've been nice if voters had noticed that before they elected him.
-
I'd sure like to see Obama "kick some ass", instead of allowing the Repubs to do the same thing they've been doing for the past eight or nine years. Mainly bully and intimidate, and use scare tactics to get what they and big business want. -
Frank: The democrats have a 60 vote majority and Obama doesn't need them at all for anything. He pretty much has let them know "We Won!" He also has pretty much let them know he doesn't need them. This is a Liberal controlled White House, Senate and House. Stop the blame game. Let's put the focus exactly where everyone who is truthful, here, understands: On the Democratic controlled Administration and Congress. They have all the marbles and they don't need the Republicans' vote. The problem Obama has is that he realizes that there is going to be a bloodbath. Please, don't say otherwise - even his own people are starting to prepare the party. Why do you suppose four Democrats announced that they are retiring - they aren't even running over the next 10 1/2 months. More will reitre before election day. He has the same problem that Clinton had - he could possibly lose the House and he would then be somewhat in the same position of Clinton - who was forced to the middle because he would not be able to get anything else approved. I may be wrong, history will decide, but I think the American people no longer trust either party. Are you happy with the Democrats? We now have senators selling their vote for $300,000,000 in one instance and Sen. Nelson just got a permanent exemption for Medicaid cost that States have to pay - Forever! All 49 other states must pick up this states cost - all for one vote! Do you believe this is what the Democrats, Republicans or Independents expect or want from their government. I don't. Getting back to my point, the people of America don't trust either party, now, and want them closely divided so they don't do too much harm. Independents have swung away from Obama in a very big way. He ran more as a centrist and now people fill lied to. Seven days before he took office he said he was fundamentally going to change America. No one had heard this before - not "Fundamentally". They expected a far more bipartisan
Blogging Rule # 5 aka how to get 1 million hits to your blog - 3 views
-
If you want hits to your blog, girls in bikinis is a good place to start!
‹ Previous
21 - 40 of 40
Showing 20▼ items per page