Coronavirus vaccine: US Presidents Obama, Clinton and Bush pledge to take Covid vaccine on TV to show its safety

Former US presidents Barack Obama, George W Bush and Bill Clinton have pledged to get vaccinated for coronavirus on television to promote the safety of the vaccine.

The trio’s effort comes as the Food and Drug Administration prepares to meet next week to decide whether to authorize a Covid-19 vaccine produced by Pfizer and BioNTech as more than 3,100 people died from the coronavirus in America on Wednesday, a record single-day high and more than the number of people killed in the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Read more at: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/dec/03/obama-clinton-bush-covid-vaccine-safety?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other

Cuba: Trump torpedoes Obama Cuba policy, takes hardline on military and travel

Trump: reestablish hard-line on Cuba

The Miami Herald reports that in an overhaul of one of his predecessor's signature legacies, President Donald Trump will redraw U.S. policy toward Cuba on Friday, tightening travel restrictions for Americans that had been loosened under President Barack Obama and banning U.S. business transactions with Cuba's vast military conglomerate.

Trump's changes are intended to sharply curtail cash flow to the Cuban government and pressure its communist leaders to let the island's fledgling private sector grow. Diplomatic relations reestablished by Obama, including reopened embassies in Washington and Havana, will remain. Travel and money sent by Cuban Americans will be unaffected, but Americans will be unable to spend money in state-run hotels or restaurants tied to the military, a significant prohibition.

Trump is expected to sign the presidential policy directive Friday, surrounded by Cuban-American supporters at Miami's Manuel Artime Theater, a venue named after one of the late leaders of the Brigade 2506 Bay of Pigs veterans whose group offered Trump their endorsement last October after he promised exiles a "better deal." The Miami Herald obtained a draft of the eight-page directive Thursday.

In his remarks, Trump plans to cite human-rights violations in Cuba as justification for the new U.S. approach. Dissidents say government repression has increased.

"The Cuban people have long suffered under a Communist regime that suppresses their legitimate aspirations for freedom and prosperity and fails to respect the essential human dignity of all Cubans," says Trump's directive, which calls the policy a set of "initial actions" by his administration.

While not a full reversal of Obama's historic Cuba rapprochement, Trump's recast U.S. policy hews closer to the hard line espoused by Cuban-American Republicans who derided Obama's 2014 policy as a capitulation. Florida Sen. Marco Rubio was instrumental in drafting Trump's changes, with help from Miami Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart. Other Cuban-American lawmakers started getting briefed on the policy Thursday.

"If we're going to have more economic engagement with Cuba, it will be with the Cuban people," Rubio told the Miami Herald.

He called the new policy a strategic, long-term attempt to force aging Cuban military and intelligence officers to ease their grip on the island's economy as a younger generation of leaders prepares to take over.

"All the pressure comes from American business interests that go to Cuba, see the opportunities and then come back here and lobby us to lift the embargo," Rubio said. "I'm trying to reverse the dynamic: I'm trying to create a Cuban business sector that now goes to the Cuban government and pressures them to create changes. I'm also trying to create a burgeoning business class independent of the government."

After decades of sanctions failed to push Fidel and Raul Castro out of power, Obama contended a Cuba more closely tied to the U.S. would no longer be able blame its economic woes on yanqui "imperialism." His backers, including prominent Miami Cuban-Americans, implored the Trump administration to give existing policy more time to play out. Like Rubio, they argued only a flourishing Cuban private sector would eventually lead to political change; where the two sides disagree is on how best to encourage private growth.

Trump's policy will not reinstate wet foot, dry foot, the policy that allowed Cuban immigrants who reached U.S. soil to remain in the country. It will not alter the U.S. trade embargo, which can only be lifted by Congress. And it will not limit travel or money sent by Cuban Americans, as former President George W. Bush did - though fewer Cuban government officials will be allowed to come to the U.S. and receive money than under Obama."You can't put the genie back in the bottle 100 percent," a senior White House official told reporters Thursday. "It's not that he's opposed to any deal with Cuba; he's opposed to a bad deal with Cuba."

Outright tourism to Cuba is prohibited by the embargo, but Obama had relaxed travel rules, allowing non-Cuban Americans to go under one of 12 legally authorized categories, such as family visits, professional research or educational activities. The Obama administration relied on what was effectively an honor system in which travelers self-reported their trip's purpose.

Under Trump's rules, travelers will be subject to a Treasury Department audit of their trip to ensure they fall under one of the permitted categories. Educational trips and so-called "people-to-people" group exchanges will fall under greater scrutiny, with educational groups once again having to travel with a guide from a U.S. organization sponsoring the trip, a requirement the Obama policy had effectively eliminated. Unlike under Obama, individuals will no longer be able to travel under the "people-to-people" category.

Stays at hotels run by the Cuban military conglomerate - many brand-name hotels - will be prohibited, but a senior White House official suggested travelers who had already booked trips would be accommodated.

The Treasury and Commerce departments will have 90 days to start writing the new rules, according to the draft directive.

The Hill Publication notes:  "Recent events indicate that the Kremlin may be seeking to return in full force. Last month Russia resumed oil shipments to Cuba for the first time in more than a decade. The Kremlin has again become the island’s savior amid a Cuban energy crisis caused by the chaos in Venezuela, its largest supplier of subsidized petroleum. This alone should set off alarm bells in the Trump White House.

Equally troubling, Putin has agreed to forgive 90 percent of Cuba’s $32 billion debt to the Soviet Union and has signed multiple agreements to invest in infrastructure developments and oil exploration. There are also reports that Russia is in conversations with Cuba to reopen a military base near Havana, which would result in a fully equipped signals intelligence station. A close military alliance between Russia and Cuba could have grave security consequences for the United States.

One obvious way to mitigate Russian influence in our hemisphere is through enhanced engagement with Cuba. Over the past two and a half years, the United States has charted a new course with Cuba, restoring diplomatic relations and allowing for expanded travel and trade. As two retired U.S. military generals wrote in an op-ed in Politico last month, cooperation with Cuba has been a game changer for regional security. Since the thaw in U.S.-Cuba relations, our two governments have signed nine formal bilateral agreements on issues related to matters of national security, including human trafficking, counter-narcotics, and cybersecurity. Why cast aside this opportunity to coordinate on cross-border and maritime law enforcement, a top priority for President Trump, and instead cede the playing field to Putin?"

Read more: Trump recasts Cuba policy, takes harder line than Obama on military, travel

India: Will Modi be as welcome in Clintondesh or Trumpistan like Obamaland?

A Friend From India Returms

Desis in America are taking a short break from the Donald-Hillary-Bernie opera to celebrate the triumphant return of Narendra Modi for yet another tete-a-tete with his friend "Barack" and an address on Capitol Hill.

Busloads of them are rumoured to be headed to Washington to "spontaneously" greet the Indian Prime Minister when he lands here Monday or at Blair House, the presidential guest house across from the White House, where he would be staying.

It may not be anything like the rockstar welcome they gave him at the Madison Square Garden in the heart of Manhattan on his first visit in 2014 or the grand reception in Silicon Valley a year later, but as they say, "it's location, location, location" that matters.

While breaking bread with President Barack Obama at the White House is now par for the course for Modi making his fourth visit to the US in two years, a speech to the US Congress is something special.

For, it was a little known law on religious freedom passed by this august body that the previous Bush administration used to revoke his US visa in 2005 and make him one of the few people on the planet to be so barred from entering America.

Four other Indian Prime Ministers, starting with Rajiv Gandhi in July 1985 have addressed a joint sitting of the House and the Senate, but only Modi is getting a rare treat -- a lunch hosted by House Speaker Paul Ryan.

Not even Jawaharlal Nehru, India's first Prime Minister, got that honour when he came to the US on a Voyage of Discovery and addressed the House members on October 13, 1949 -- though in a different chamber with the US Capitol under renovation.

Republican chairs and top Democrats on the House and Senate foreign relations panels as also India caucuses too are hosting a reception where leading Indian-Americans would rub shoulders with Modi.

Indian envoy Arun K. Singh looks at the Modi visit, in the midst of a hot political campaign not as a farewell call on Obama, but as part of "consolidation and celebration" of a relationship that has since 2000 undergone a transformation under three presidents.

It will also, in a sense, launch into the next administration, but a meeting with any of the three warring presidential candidates - would-be Republican nominee Donald Trump, Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton or her pesky persistent rival Bernie sanders, who refuses to say die - is not on the cards.

Indian American groups, however, are reaching out to the campaigns of both "Dangerous Donald" who is "fit for the shrink" as Clinton suggests and "Crooked Hillary" who "has to go to jail" over her email scandal as the mogul asserts.

The desi crowd has been generally supportive of Democrats, but this time around, there are Indian-American groups for both Hillary and Trump and the two Indian origin Republican stars, Bobby Jindal and Nikki Haley have vowed to vote Trump "warts and all".

While the "unique reception" on the Capitol Hill is seen as a reflection of the bipartisan support to India-US relationship and Clinton is a fairly known quantity in New Delhi, The Donald's pronouncements have left many "rattled", as Obama believes.

No one knows for sure which one of his "Make America Great Again" hats would the mogul don in the White House - the angry red or friendly white -- that signalled his daily moods to his long-time butler.

With Trump "evolving" his stand on issues ranging from a temporary ban on the entry of Muslims to coveted H1B visas for skilled workers every day and sometimes by the hour, pundits are left scratching their heads over his foreign policy.

But, looking at how Modi has charmed his way into Obamaland in two short years, diplomats and desis alike are pretty confident that he would be equally welcome when he comes calling again - be it Clintondesh or Trumpistan!

Read more: Will Modi be as welcome in Clintondesh or Trumpistan like Obamaland?

USA: "We are not a Christian nation: Ronald Reagan, John F. Kennedy and the eternal lie of the “city upon a hill”

When Barack Obama delivered his first inaugural address six years ago last week, on January 20, 2009, it was the first time a newly elected president used the occasion to give voice to the diversity of religious life among its people. “We are a nation of Christians and Muslims,” Obama said, “Jews and Hindus, and nonbelievers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth.”

Such a high­-profile expression of the varieties of American religious experience was unprecedented, even if the reality it described predates the Republic itself. A spectrum of beliefs informed the nation’s history well before its first president, in his 1789 inaugural address, spoke of “that Almighty Being who rules over the universe.” Yet Obama’s choice of words served as a reminder that only recently did the range of opinions about the nature of that Being, including its existence, begin to receive their due in the ongoing national conversation about the appropriate place of religion in American life.

Perhaps most noteworthy about the president’s acknowledgment that the United States is a country of many faiths was that it seemed noteworthy at all. His simple declaration of a catalogue of beliefs surprised many because there persists, among believers and nonbelievers alike, an assumption that the United States is, for better or worse, a Christian nation.

Nothing has done more to keep this notion alive than the stubborn persistence of words spoken more than a century before this land was a nation at all: John Winthrop’s designation of the community he would establish in America as a “city upon a hill.” Some historians have doubted these words were ever spoken, but tradition maintains that in 1630, while the Puritan settlers of Massachusetts Bay were still aboard the Arabella, the governor of the colony delivered a sermon comparing their humble settlement to a lofty city described in a parable of Jesus.

For at least the past fifty years, that single unifying metaphor has dominated presidential rhetoric about the nation’s self-understanding, causing an image borrowed from the Gospels to become a tenet of faith in America’s civil religion. While not a direct refutation, Obama’s statement of religious diversity presented a challenge to reconsider the meaning, and even the relevance, of this image in the twenty­-first century.

Read more: We are not a Christian nation: Ronald Reagan, John F. Kennedy and the eternal lie of the “city upon a hill” - Salon.com

US Legal System: Obama cites 'deep unfairness' in how laws are enforced - by Jennifer Epstein

President Barack Obama reasserted his commitment Thursday to improving relations between law enforcement agencies and the people they police, alluding to the deaths of Eric Garner and Michael Brown.
“Unfortunately in recent days,” there have been reminders of the “deep unfairness when it comes to the gap between our professed ideals and how laws are applied on a day-to-day basis,” Obama said.

Obama’s comments came at the second College Opportunity Summit, an effort by the president and first lady Michelle Obama to expand access to higher education and improve studen
 
Read more: Obama cites 'deep unfairness' in how laws are enforced - Jennifer Epstein - POLIT\

 

Iraq: Obama 'urgently' considering air assault on targets in Syria and Iraq - by Spencer Ackerman

The Obama administration is urgently considering an air assault on Islamic extremists that officials told the Guardian could be directed at targets in Syria as well as Iraq.

President Obama announced on Friday that in the "days ahead" he will decide on a package of military and diplomatic options to halt the rapid advance of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (Isis), as the jihadist army's march from Syria through Sunni Iraq has upended Obama's achievement of extricating the US military from the Iraq conflict.

Obama has ruled out sending US soldiers and marines back to the Iraqi streets they patrolled from 2003 to 2011, but signalled a new, reluctant openness to returning the US to war in Iraq.

Isis "could pose a threat eventually to American interests as well," Obama said in a televised address, but vowed not to be "dragged back into a situation in which, while we're there keeping a lid on things, and after
enormous sacrifices by us, as soon as we're not there, people end up acting in ways that are not conducive to the long-term stability and  prosperity of the country."

Obama 'urgently' considering air assault on targets in Syria and Iraq | World news | The Guardian

Russia: Obama cancels upcoming meeting with Putin - by Philip Rucker

President Obama will cancel a planned meeting in Moscow with Russian President Vladimir Putin amid mounting anger over Russia’s decision to allow National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden into the country, the White House said Wednesday.

Obama had intended to visit Russia’s capital and meet with Putin in advance of next month’s G-20 summit in St. Petersburg. But Obama has decided he will not meet with Putin one-on-one -- a rare diplomatic snub -- and will only attend the G-20 summit.

“Following a careful review begun in July, we have reached the conclusion that there is not enough recent progress in our bilateral agenda with Russia to hold a U.S.-Russia Summit in early September,” White House press secretary Jay Carney said in a statement.

Carney cited a “lack of progress” with Russia over the past 12 months on a broad range of issues including missile defense and arms control, trade and commercial relations, global security issues and human rights and civil society. Carney added that Russia’s “disappointing decision” to grand Snowden temporary asylum was also a factor.

“We have informed the Russian Government that we believe it would be more constructive to postpone the summit until we have more results from our shared agenda,” Carney said.

Obama cancels upcoming meeting with Putin - The Washington Post

Middle East: What Should Obama Do About Syria?- by Dexter Filkins

"In several statements by the rebel-led city council in Syria said that the Assad regime is using sarin and possibly chlorine gas to attack them.  But how accurate are these statements?"

President Obama on several occasions has declared that if the regime used chemical weapons, or even prepared to use them, it would be crossing a “red line.’’ But the Administration has taken care not to make the line too sharp, referring not just to chemical weapons but to “a whole bunch” of chemical weapons, used in a “systematic” way. And though Obama has said that such attacks would be a “game changer,” he has stopped short of saying that they would be cause for military force.

Joseph Holliday, a former Army intelligence officer who has studied the conflict for the Institute for the Study of War, in Washington, suggested that the regime was attempting to use the weapons in a way that would frighten the rebels but wouldn’t cross the red line. “Assad has been extremely calculating with the use of force, increasing the levels of violence gradually, so as not to set off alarm bells,” he said. “First it was artillery. Then it was bombing. Then it was Scuds. A year ago, he wasn’t killing a hundred people a day.

He’s introducing chemical weapons gradually, so we get used to them.” The attacks in March and April took place in areas that were either contested or held by the regime, and they killed relatively few people, at a time when, elsewhere in the country, a hundred people were dying every day. “If it’s not a big attack, it’s not easy to determine whether chemical weapons have been used,” a Senate aide told me. “The cloud disperses—there’s no mushroom cloud. Maybe Assad bombards the area afterward to cover up the evidence.” Indeed, some experts said that the regime was using the attacks specifically to gauge the resolve of Obama and the West. “Assad appears to be testing the tactical value of his chemical arsenal,” Gary Samore, who until February was President Obama’s chief adviser on weapons of mass destruction, said. “But he’s testing the political limits, too.”

Senior Israeli officials and Republicans in Washington, as well as British and French intelligence officials, have argued forcefully that the regime used chemical weapons. The Administration’s response has been characterized by caution, indecision, and reluctance to speak publicly about the subject. Officials said in late April that they believed chemical weapons had been used at least twice, but that they could not definitely tie the attacks to Assad. The White House said that it was not entirely clear who was in control of the weapons, leaving open the possibility that the attacks were accidental or unauthorized. “Given the stakes involved, and what we have learned from our recent experience, intelligence assessments alone are not sufficient,” the White House wrote in a letter to congressional leaders. Instead, the Administration would rely on the United Nations, which planned to send in experts to test soil and take samples from victims. Assad refused to allow the experts into the country. 

Note EU-Digest: President Obama is to be complimented for being cautious and not willing to drag the world into another military conflict in the Middle East, regardless of the pressure exerted on him by right-wing hawks in the US, Israel, Turkey and the EU

Read more: Dexter Filkins: What Should Obama Do About Syria? : The New Yorker

EU-USA: The transatlantic trough

Plagued by deep domestic problems, Barack Obama would love to outsource many international issues to the EU in his second term. The problem is no one knows whether Europe is up to the task, writes Ivan Krastev. 

Is the European Union willing and capable to preserve the current liberal European order at the moment when Russia has turned her back on the West, Turkey has lost hope of joining the EU and the European periphery lies in shambles?

And would the EU be America's reliable partner outside Europe at a moment when Washington lacks the resources and the appetite to be the global policeman while the world is in constant turmoil?

These are probably the two critical questions that will define President Barack Obama's European agenda during his second term.

Read more: The transatlantic trough | Transatlantic Voices | DW.DE | 17.01.2013

US Presidential Elections: Obama is either ahead or the state polls are wrong

President Obama in New Jersey

Latest polls: States: CO: CNN/ORC: Obama 50-48%, NC: High Point University: Romney 46-45%. WI: St. Norbert College: Obama 51-42%.

“Election officials were ordering generators, moving voting locations and figuring out how to transport poll workers displaced from coastal areas as Tuesday’s presidential election became the latest challenge for states whacked by Superstorm Sandy,” the AP writes. “The storm, which devastated East Coast communities with power outages, flooding and snow, had already disrupted early voting in parts of Maryland, West Virginia, New Jersey and North Carolina. With less than a week to go before the general election, officials in the hardest-hit states were scrambling to ensure orderly and fair balloting in places still dark or under water.”

And: Michael McDonald, a professor of public affairs at George Mason University in Virginia who studies turnout, said a calamitous weather event right before a presidential election was unprecedented. McDonald said that in such a tight presidential race any turnout diminished by Sandy could make a difference in the overall popular vote. ‘It’s unlikely disruptions from Sandy would affect the outcome of the election within those states,’ McDonald said. ‘But if those voters, who are mostly Democrats, end up being subtracted from the national popular vote, you'll get a lower vote share for Obama than he would have received if those people had voted.’”

A First Read analysis finds that in the coastal counties most affected by the storm in the four states affected by Sandy and assuming 2008 totals and a 15 percent reduction in turnout, President Obama would stand to lose a net of about 340,000 votes. He could lose 247,000 out of New York, 60,000 out of New Jersey, 29,000 out of Connecticut, and 3,600 out of Rhode Island.

Read more: 2012: Obama is either ahead or the state polls are wrong - First Read

NATO's Portugal meeting: Obama announces deal on missile defense system

President Obama said Friday that he has reached agreement with NATO allies to develop a missile defense shield that would protect Europe and the U.S.

The group immediately issued an invitation to Russia to participate, and top U.S. officials sounded confident that Russian President Dmitri Medvedev would react positively. Obama's point person at the summit in Lisbon said he thought the proposal would trigger a moment of cooperation between Russia and NATO.

For more: NATO's Portugal meeting: Obama announces deal on missile defense system - latimes.com

US Politcs - Obama is Getting Things Done and Pushes Through Agenda Despite Political Risks

If passage of the financial regulatory overhaul on Thursday proves anything about President Obama, it is this: He knows how to push big bills through a balky Congress. But Mr. Obama’s legislative success poses a paradox: while he may be winning on Capitol Hill, he is losing with voters at a time of economic distress and soon may be forced to scale back his ambitions, The New York Times’s Sheryl Gay Stolberg writes.

The financial regulatory bill is the final piece of a legislative hat trick that also included the stimulus bill and the landmark new health care law. Over the last 18 months, Mr. Obama and the Democratic Congress have made considerable inroads in passing what could be the most ambitious agenda in decades.

For more: Obama Pushes Through Agenda Despite Political Risks - DealBook Blog - NYTimes.com

G-20 Differences: Half-Hearted Promises and Mutual Blame - setback for Obama

The G-20 summit in Toronto ended with yet more vague promises. The rich nations pledged to slash their budget deficits, without making any real commitments. The result is a setback for President Obama, who failed to find support for new stimulus programs in Europe.

At least Chancellor Angela Merkel managed to look happy. The German team had just beaten England 4:1 at the World Cup as a radiant Merkel addressed the press at the summit of the 20 leading developed and emerging economies in Toronto. "This was a great game and a great victory," she said after watching the second half of the game together with British Prime Minister David Cameron. "I am still very moved."

The chancellor, who was wearing a garish reddish-orange blazer, was in a jubilant mood. She wanted to immediately announce another victory -- this time one of her own. In reality, the results of the G-20 summit are much less impressive than Merkel would have the press believe. The expectations for the Toronto meeting had been low -- and they were not exceeded.

For more: G-20 Differences: Half-Hearted Promises and Mutual Blame - SPIEGEL ONLINE - News - International

Dalai Lama and Obama to meet tomorrow

The meeting comes amid tension in US-Sino relations, with disputes simmering over US arms sales to Taiwan, claims of Chinese cyber-spying and trade deals.

China, which views the Dalai Lama as a separatist, has warned the meeting will undermine relations.

The US, while moving carefully on the issue, dismissed the fears as needless.

For the complete report - BBC News - Dalai Lama lands in US ahead of talks with Barack Obama

Europe hails but won't copy Obama bank fee plan

Europe's leading economies showed no sign on Friday of adopting U.S. President Barack Obama's proposal for a levy on banks to repay taxpayers for bailouts but vowed to press on with their own ideas to target the sector. The president of the Eurogroup of euro zone finance ministers, Jean-Claude Juncker, said Obama was right to propose the plan, which foresees Wall Street banks paying up to $117 billion to reimburse taxpayers for bailing them out.

In France, Economy Minister Christine Lagarde said Obama's plans were appropriate for the United States while France's steps are suited for its domestic situation.

The French government has said it plans to put a 50 percent tax on traders' bonuses of above 27,500 euros ($39,670). Britain has announced a 50 percent levy on banks paying bonuses of over 25,000 pounds ($40,850).

For more : Europe hails but won't copy Obama bank fee plan | Reuters

USA Today: G20: Obama: Iran's secret nuke facility 'inconsistent with a peaceful program'

For the complete report from USA Today click on this link

G20 - Obama: Iran's secret nuke facility 'inconsistent with a peaceful program

President Obama opened G-20 summit day with a bang this morning, condemning Iran for hiding the existence of a secret nuclear facility and demanding that it be opened to international inspections. "The size and configuration of this facility is inconsistent with a peaceful (nuclear) program," Obama said, and further raises concerns that Iran is seeking a nuclear weapon. "Iran is breaking rules that all nations must follow, endangering the global nonproliferation regime," Obama said. "denying its own people access to the opportunity they deserve, and threatening the stability and security of the region and the world."

Obama made the announcement along with Great Britain Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy.

Note EU-Digest: Even though Iran's nuclear adventures are a most serious issue, it is important that the leaders present at the G20 remember that the principal reason they came to Pittsburgh is to work on remedies to correct the serious economic flaws which still exist in the world financial system.

Boston Globe: "No more troops to Afghanistan" - by HDS Greenway

For the complete report from The Boston Globe click on this link

"No more troops to Afghanistan" - by HDS Greenway

With General Stanley A. McChrystal’s report calling for additional troops now public, President Obama will soon have his King Henry moment; whether or not to send more troops into the ever-worsening war in Afghanistan. Much depends on his definition of the mission. Is it to defeat the Taliban in battle as Henry defeated the flower of French chivalry? There will be no famous victories in the irregular warfare that has so marked Afghanistan over the centuries. Is it to create a viable, democratic, centralized state on a Western model? When he came to power, Obama seemed to realize that the mission of his predecessor, George W. Bush, was too ambitious and that he should settle for simply making Afghanistan inhospitable to Al Qaeda. In the meantime, however, “mission creep’’ - the tendency of any mission to expand and grow if it is not carefully pruned - has been the order of the day. Obama runs the risk of turning Afghanistan into a full-fledged dependency of the United States.

Recently, when asked if he risked the fate of Lyndon Johnson whose presidency was consumed by a war started by his predecessors, but which he chose to reinforce, Obama replied: “You have to learn lessons from history. On the other hand, each historical moment is different. You never step into the same river twice. And so Afghanistan is not Vietnam.’’

AP: Europe: Some hits, some misses for Obama - by Jennefir Loven

For the complete report from the AP click on this link

Europe: Some hits, some misses for Obama - by Jennifir Loven

Stop after stop, crowds are thronging, leaders gushing, headlines blaring. Even a roomful of foreign reporters applauded after President Barack Obama's London news conference. They love him over here. But are they giving him anything else to take home? It's a mixed bag: some success, several failures and much still to be determined.

Alternet: US economy - America in Free Fall - by Robert L. Borosage

for the complete report from AlterNet click on this link

US economy - America in Free Fall-by Robert L. Borosage

The U.S. has lost private sector jobs for 10 straight months. One quarter of all businesses in the U.S. plan to cut payroll over the next year. Retail sales fell in October by the largest monthly drop on record. Auto sales have collapsed, driving the auto companies towards the precipice. Unemployment is up to 6.1 percent, with most analysts predicting it will soar past 8 percent over the next year. (That translates into unemployment among young minority men at rates of 50 percent or more). States are now facing $100 billion in deficits in operating budgets for the next fiscal year. Twelve million homes are "under water," worth less than their mortgages.

A stunning report by Eric Lotke at the Campaign for America's Future details the staggering investment deficits that have accumulated over the last 30 years. For decades, we've chosen to cut taxes on the wealthy while starving vital public investments. The result is an America that is literally falling apart, while much of the private wealth was squandered in the speculative frenzy that now has leveled our economy. Rather than adding to that folly, we should be focusing on strategic public investments that will put people to work in the short term while contributing to a more competitive economy, a better-educated citizenry and a cleaner environment.

Guardian.co.uk: US Economy - Obama should spend money on healthcare to stimulate the economy - by Dean Baker

For the complete report from the guardian.co.uk click on this link

US Economy: Obama should spend money on healthcare to stimulate the economy - by Dean Baker

Few presidents will come into office having generated the sort of expectations Barack Obama created over the course of his campaign. The country's economic crisis poses substantial dangers but it also presents enormous opportunities. If President Obama is prepared to seize these opportunities, he will establish himself as one of the countries truly great presidents, alongside Lincoln and Roosevelt. Specifically, Obama can take advantage of the current economic crisis to announce plans to jump-start national health insurance. Extending health insurance can be an effective stimulus that will provide an immediate boost to the economy. More importantly, it will provide the same access to healthcare that people in other wealthy countries have long taken for granted.

The backdrop is straightforward. Economists from across the political spectrum are now calling for a large stimulus package to limit the economy's decline and the rise in unemployment. The consensus is in the range of 2.0-2.5% of GDP, or $300-400bn a year.