AZ BlueMeanie

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

On Tuesday, Sen. John McCain gave a red meat speech to conservative Cuban Americans in Miami to criticize Barack Obama for his position on being willing to negotiate with leaders of countries with which the U.S. disagrees, and in particular, for suggesting that gradual normalization of relations with Cuba might bring about the democratization of Cuba faster than continuing the decades old hard line position favored by conservatives.  (The U.S. trade embargo and travel restrictions to Cuba in place since 1963 have proven to be entirely ineffective in achieving the democratization of Cuba).

Andrew Romano at Newsweek’s Stumper blog provides insightful analysis:

"Obama’s stance on Cuba isn’t a clear-cut as the Arizonan led his audience to believe today–nor is McCain’s itself. During his 2000 presidential campaign, in fact, McCain "stood out for supporting normalizing relations with Cuba, even if Fidel Castro remained in power, provided the government went through certain steps to democratize the country," as the New York Times put it today. During a 2000 CNN interview, McCain said, "I’m not in favor of sticking my finger in the eye of Fidel Castro," and reiterated his support for a "road map to normalization" similar to Vietnam’s. And despite saying this afternoon that "the embargo must stay in place" until the Cuban regime "schedule[s] internationally monitored elections," McCain told the Miami Herald in 1999 that he would be willing to wait on that goal before beginning steps toward normalization. And so on. For McCain, the shift is a matter of tone–from moderation to politically-expedient hawkishness–rather than policy. Still, they make his attacks on Obama’s own moderation–the Illinois senator may not favor "preconditions," but he’s always advocated for "preparations" that involve "human rights, releasing of political prisoners, opening up the press"–somewhat harder to swallow. In the end, Obama and McCain’s policies towards Cuba don’t differ all that much (even if their approaches to its leader do)–after all, neither would remove the embargo without significant political concessions. But their attitudes–and rhetoric–are miles apart, as McCain homes in on traditional hard-liners and Obama targets a younger generation that favors engagement (and his plan to allow for unlimited family visitation and remittances to the island)."

In fact, on an episode of Hardball on May 1st, 2000, McCain was asked by Chris Matthews what he thought about relations with Cuba, and he said he was open to concessions and a "a road map for negotiations," saying that the only precondition he would demand would be that the Cuban regime empty its political prisons…

Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-NE) Tuesday night took umbrage with several positions taken by the McCain campaign, including the Arizona Senator’s criticism of Obama for pledging to engage with Iran.  Engagement is not, and should not be confused for, capitulation, he argued.

"I never understand how anyone in any realm of civilized discourse could sort through the big issues and challenges and threats and figure out how to deal with those without engaging in some way…."

Hagel was a political thorn in McCain’s side on Tuesday night, repeatedly lavishing praise on the presumptive Democratic candidate and levying major foreign policy criticisms at the GOP nominee and the Republican Party as a whole.  At one point, Hagel even urged the Arizona Republican to elevate his campaign discourse to a higher, more honest level.

"If you engage a world power or a rival, it doesn’t mean you agree with them or subscribe with what they believe or you support them in any way," he said. "What it does tell you is that you’ve got a problem you need to resolve. And you’ve got to understand the other side and the other side has got to understand you."

Chuck Hagel Takes On McCain, Repeatedly Praises Obama – Politics on The Huffington Post

Adding insult to injury, President Bush announced on Wednesday a loosening of U.S. restrictions that will allow Cuban Americans in the United States to send cellphones to family members in Cuba. (Apparently he didn’t get the memo). The president said it was now up to the Cuban government to decide whether it would allow its citizens to receive the phones.

The new policy follows Cuban announcements that citizen there would be allowed to own cellphones and computers, and that DVDs and toasters would be available in coming years. With computers, Bush said, they would have open access to the Internet, now prohibited, and with toasters, he added, they should live under an economic system in which they could "stop worrying about whether they have bread every day."  Bush allows Americans to send cellphones to relatives in Cuba – Los Angeles Times

Posted by AZBlueMeanie: John Aravosis over at AmericaBlog.com asks: I’m waiting for John McCain and George Bush to explain to the American people how the Israelis are actually Holocaust appeasers, that should be fun to watch. Seriously, the media has to ask John McCain and George Bush why their harsh words about Barack Obama don’t … Read more

Posted by: AZBlueMeanie:

Senator Arthur Vandenberg (R-MI), is credited with the bipartisan entreaty that "politics stops at the water’s edge" in American foreign policy.

Of course, members of Congress and even former presidents of both political parties in recent decades have departed from Vandenberg’s entreaty.

Never before has a sitting president, the titular head of the United States government, while on an official state visit, before a session of the elected government of a sovereign state, inserted into a formal state speech a partisan political campaign attack meant for domestic political consumption. 

Patrick Buchanan, the uber conservative political commentator for MSNBC (and frequent author on the presidency) commented that for a sitting president to make this kind of statement while abroad about the other party’s presumptive nominee, is unprecedented.  I will take Pat at his word for historical context.

For President Bush to draw an historically false analogy by comparing the appeasement of Adolph Hitler by European governments in the Munich Agreement of 1938 (permitting German annexation of Chekoslovakia’s Sudetenland) with diplomacy and negotiation with Iran before the Israeli Knesset on the 60th anniversary of Israel’s independence was beyond the pale.  Bush embarrassed Americans with his petty politicking.

Following is the offensive passage from the official White House transcript of Bush’s speech President Bush Addresses Members of the Knesset:

"There are good and decent people who cannot fathom the darkness in these men and try to explain away their words. It’s natural, but it is deadly wrong. As witnesses to evil in the past, we carry a solemn responsibility to take these words seriously. Jews and Americans have seen the consequences of disregarding the words of leaders who espouse hatred. And that is a mistake the world must not repeat in the 21st century.

Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: "Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided." We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history."

"Some seem to believe…"  "Some people say…"  Anytime you hear President Bush begin a sentence with this phrase, you can be certain that what follows is a Straw Man fallacy.

The Straw Man fallacy is committed when a person simply ignores a person’s actual position and substitutes a distorted, exaggerated or misrepresented version of that position. This sort of "reasoning" has the following pattern:

1. Person A has position X.
2. Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
3. Person B attacks position Y.
4. Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

This sort of "reasoning" is fallacious because attacking a distorted version of a position simply does not constitute an attack on the position itself.  Fallacy: Straw Man

President Bush has utilized this dishonest and misleading rhetorical technique repeatedly throughout his administration, often to great effect when it is repeated by a servile media.

President Bush does not tell you, of course, that "some people" who want to engage in diplomacy and negotiation with Iran and other "state sponsors of terrorism" are none other than members of Bush’s own administration.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates in a speech to the American Academy of Diplomacy just the day before Gates: U.S. Should Engage Iran With Incentives, Pressure – washingtonpost.com said that:

"We need to figure out a way to develop some leverage . . . and then sit down and talk with them," Gates said. "If there is going to be a discussion, then they need something, too. We can’t go to a discussion and be completely the demander, with them not feeling that they need anything from us.

* * *

"[M]y personal view would be we ought to look for ways outside of government to open up the channels and get more of a flow of people back and forth." Noting that "a fair number" of Iranians regularly visit the United States, he said, "We ought to increase the flow the other way . . . of Americans" visiting Iran."

Secretary Gates publicly favored engagement with Iran before taking his current job in late 2006. In 2004, he co-authored a Council on Foreign Relations report titled "Iran: Time for a New Approach."  Gates was also a member of the bipartisan 2006 Iraq Study Group, which advocated reaching out to Iran.

The Bush administration also considers Syria a state sponsor of terrorism.  But Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice met with Syria’s foreign minister Walid al-Moallem in face-to-face talks at Sharm el Sheikh, Egypt on May 3, 2007.  Rice Meets Syrian Foreign Minister – New York Times

Secretary Rice also has said “I am prepared to meet my counterpart or an Iranian representative at any time if Iran will suspend its enrichment and reprocessing activities."  Secretary Rice said the U.S. would hold direct talks with Iran if Tehran suspended its nuclear program.  Rice: Direct Iran talks, with conditions – Iran- msnbc.com

The Bush administration previously negotiated an agreement with "state sponsor of terrorism" Libya, and is presently engaged in negotiations with the repressive regime of North Korea.  The repressive regimes of Pakistan (home to Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda) and Saudi Arabia (home to 15 of the 19 hijackers who attacked the U.S. on 9/11) are considered "allies" by the Bush administration.

It is rank hypocrisy to suggest that diplomacy and negotiation with these governments is tantamount to Nazi appeasement – it doesn’t even make sense – when the Bush administration itself is currently engaged in ongoing diplomacy and negotiation with these governments.

Posted by: AZBlueMeanie

Nissan is the first auto manufacturer to say it will sell mass market, all-electric vehicles worldwide.  “Nissan is upping the ante tremendously. They are the first to put it on the line and say we’re going to have an all-electric vehicle for a certain market by a certain date,” said John O’Dell, senior editor at the auto Web site GreenCarAdvisor.com. 

As reported in the New York Times on Tuesday  Nissan Plans Electric Car in U.S. by ’10 – New York Times:

By BILL VLASIC

DETROIT — The Nissan Motor Company plans to sell an electric car in the United States and Japan by 2010, raising the stakes in the race to develop environmentally friendly vehicles.

The commitment — expected to be announced Tuesday by Nissan’s chief executive, Carlos Ghosn — will be the first by a major automaker to bring a zero-emission vehicle to the American market. Nissan also expects to sell a lineup of electric vehicles globally by 2012.

In an interview Monday, Mr. Ghosn said Nissan decided to accelerate development of battery-powered vehicles because of high gasoline prices and environmental concerns, not just because of the need to meet stricter fuel-economy standards.

“What we are seeing is that the shifts coming from the markets are more powerful than what regulators are doing,” he said.

Mr. Ghosn said Nissan envisioned a broad range of electric vehicles, starting with small cars, and adding: “It’s not only about a small city car or a small minivan. It can also be about a small commercial vehicle and a small crossover.”

Mr. Ghosn was not always enthusiastic about alternative-fuel technology. In a 2005 speech to the National Automobile Dealers Association, he called gas-electric hybrids “niche products” useful only to meet strict fuel-economy and emission standards in states like California.

“It wasn’t long ago that Carlos Ghosn was a big naysayer about the role of electric vehicles,” said John O’Dell, senior editor at the auto Web site GreenCarAdvisor.com. “Obviously, something has opened his eyes.”

Other automakers like Mitsubishi Motors and Fuji Heavy Industries are testing versions of electric cars, and General Motors and Toyota are working on battery-powered vehicles that have small gasoline engines for recharging. G.M. plans to start producing the Chevrolet Volt in 2010, while Toyota expects to offer a similar, so-called “plug-in” hybrid around the same time.

But Nissan, which a decade ago was on the brink of bankruptcy, is the first manufacturer to say it will sell mass market, all-electric vehicles worldwide. The zero emissions refers to those from the car’s tailpipe and not those from the production of electricity used to power the car.

Still, Mr. O’Dell said: “Nissan is upping the ante tremendously. They are the first to put it on the line and say we’re going to have an all-electric vehicle for a certain market by a certain date.”

(Article continues below the fold)

Posted by: AzBlueMeanie (Thanks to tw3k for this photoshop of the On The Take Express) The press poodles for McCain over at the Arizona Daily Star continue to censor any critical reporting about the senator being on the take to his campaign contributors. You may recall that the Star recently did not publish any mention … Read more