Ten reasons Obama won the Nobel

The original post says "deserved". I won't grant that, though -- as the citation notes, 'fact has no affiliation' -- this should end the discussion (and would if the whining objectors had any common sense whatsoever):

1. Before he became president -- Obama forcefully argued, at great political risk, that the U.S. should talk to its enemies (famously, in a debate with John McCain). He convinced a majority of Americans, and that is now U.S. foreign policy.
   
2. January 22 - On his second day in office, Obama announced plans to close Guantanamo in a year. He has made great diplomatic efforts to find residences for innocent detainees, even as fearmongers accused him of wanting to release terrorists in America.
   
3. February 27 - Obama details his plans to pull out of Iraq. He made his speech in front of uniformed Marines and explained that combat troops would be out by 2010.
   
4. March 13 - Obama Justice department drops 'enemy combatants' label on detainees, marking a return to the Geneva Conventions.
   
5. April 5 - Outlines details of nuclear weapons reductions plan in a speech to the public in Prague. The plan calls for intense international diplomacy and a respect for the right of fledgling countries to enrich uranium for energy purposes, proposing an international nuclear fuel-bank for those aims. All this was in the face of North Korean long-range missile testing.
6. April 13 - Repeals restrictions on Cuban Americans, allowing them to visit home as long as they want and to send money. Also allows telecommunications companies to pursue agreements in Cuba, hoping to promote communcation. This is the boldest move towards peace with Cuba any president has made in over 40 years.
   
7. June 4 - Obama makes landmark speech in Cairo, in which he quotes three different holy texts and speaks Arabic. Again, at tremendous political risk at home, Obama makes empassioned tribute to the achiements of the Muslim world and admits U.S. role in overthrow of Iranian government, attempting to create environment of honesty, respect, and cooperation.
   
8. June 27 - The U.S. begins removal of combat troops from major cities in Iraq.
9. July 6 - Obama heads to Russia to speak with Russian president about nuclear arms reduction. He makes a speech at a Russian University, notably saying, "There is the 20th century view that United States and Russia are destined to be antagonists. And that a strong Russia or a strong America can only assert themselves in opposition to one another. And there is a 19th century view, that we are destined to vie for spheres of influence and that great powers must forge competing blocs to balance on another. These assumptions are wrong. In 2009, a great power does not show strength by dominating or demonishing other countries. The days when empires could treat sovereign states as pieces on a chessboard are over."
10. Sept 24 - In a first for a U.S. president, Obama presides over a U.N. Security Council summit, where members unanimously agreed to a sweeping strategy to stop the spread of and ultimately eliminate nuclear weapons

On June 2nd, Obama stood with Nancy Reagan and signed legislation marking the 100th anniversary of her husband and calling for celebration of his achievements as president. Wouldn't it be nice if some in our country could be as humble as to recognize the positive achievements of someone they didn't vote for?

President Obama is making great strides towards peace, which are all the more impressive when you consider the political environment that has developed in the U.S. over the past several years, where torture is acceptable by many, searching for peace is called "demasculating America" by Rush Limbaugh, and Joe Scarborough says there is "no upside" for winning the Nobel Peace Prize.

President Bush said that we are a peace loving nation. I'll let the reader decide if that is true.

Obama finds cure for cancer

Harris County GOP cries: "MD Anderson has been bankrupted"


Eleven and one-half months is more than long enough to stay stuck on stupid, much less in Sore-Loserland.

What do you think will be this week's Faux Outrage?

Perry received arson report minutes before Willingham executed

Should the governor be condemned to death for killing an innocent man?

Just 88 minutes before the February 2004 execution of Cameron Todd Willingham, Gov. Rick Perry's office received by fax a crucial arson expert's opinion that later ignited a political firestorm over whether Texas, on Perry's watch, used botched forensic evidence to send a man to his death.

In a letter sent Feb. 14, three days before Willingham was scheduled to die, Perry had been asked to postpone the execution. The condemned man's attorney argued that the newly obtained expert evidence showed Willingham had not set the house fire that killed his daughters, 2-year-old Amber and 1-year-old twins Karmon and Kameron, two days before Christmas in 1991.

On Feb. 17, the day of the execution, Perry's office got the five-page faxed report at 4:52 p.m., according to documents the Houston Chronicle obtained in response to a public records request.

But it's unclear from the records whether he read it that day. Perry's office has declined to release any of his or his staff's comments or analysis of the reprieve request.

A statement from Perry spokesman Chris Cutrone, sent to the Chronicle late Friday, said that “given the brevity of (the) report and the general counsel's familiarity with all the other facts in the case, there was ample time for the general counsel to read and analyze the report and to brief the governor on its content.”

A few minutes after 5 p.m., defense lawyer Walter M. Reaves Jr. said he received word that the governor would not intervene. At 6:20 p.m. Willingham was executed after declaring: “I am an innocent man, convicted of a crime I did not commit.”

How about we just end Perry's political life -- right now? Not wait for March or November 2010? Demand his immediate resignation.

Oh wait, I almost forgot: this is Texas.

Sunday Funnies (Make this War More Gay edition)

"Better to be thrown accolades than shoes"

The bellowing indignation over Obama's Nobel certainly -- and rather successfully -- minimizes the intolerable hell the rest of the world endured during the previous eight years.

"Certainly from our standpoint, this gives us a sense of momentum — when the United States has accolades tossed its way, rather than shoes."

That's the take of Hillary Clinton's State Department on President Obama being awarded the Nobel Peace Prize, according to her spokesman, Assistant Secretary PJ Crowley.

Crowley was referring to the incident last December when an Iraqi journalist threw his shoes at President George W. Bush during his final visit to Iraq of his presidency.

Muntader Zaidi, who worked for the Iraqi television station Al Baghdadiya, hurled both his shoes at Bush and called him a "dog" during a press conference with Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. He narrowly missed the president, who quickly ducked.

The shoe-throwing, considered one of the highest insults in the Middle East, illustrated the deep anger toward the United States over its invasion and occupation of Iraq.

Crowley's comments suggested a recognition by the Obama administration that the Nobel Prize was as much an indictment of the Bush administration as it was an effort to praise President Obama's outreach to improve the US image around the world.

Echoing comments by the White House, Crowley said the award was not just an "affirmation" of the Obama administration's foreign policy strategy of engagement, but also on its robust foreign policy agenda, which includes non-proliferation, dealing with Iran and North Korea, and pursuing peace in the Middle East.

"There is an opportunity here," Crowley said. "The tone has changed — but obviously we recognize that, while the tone in the world has changed, the challenges remain. They are very significant."

Forget the missing weapons of mass destruction and the Nigerian yellowcake and the smearing of an ambassador and the outing of his wife as a CIA agent. Overlook the torture of Iraqi POWs and the warrantless wiretapping of Americans (after all, Obama isn't moving nearly fast enough on either of those to satisfy me, for certain). Disregard even the photos of Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse that continue to be shielded from public view, perhaps forever if Congress gets it way.

Consider only the non-American lives lost: the millions of innocent Iraqi civilians whose misfortune was to be in the way of the bombs and the bullets from both sides, the "coalition of the willing"'s soldiers whose leaders were browbeaten into supporting the war of lies, the deaths by torture and rape at the hands of American troops.

By all means, I expect Obama to actually accomplish a hell of a lot more than he has to this point. President Kumbayah has maxed out on victories by smile and speech.

But if the Nobel committee wants to bet on the come, good on 'em. It's their money. And if anybody wants to keep on playing the tear-down game, they're just stuck in Sore-Loserville.

And Harvey Wasserman, via The Rag Blog, is correct: this Nobel is a pay-it-forward request from the international community to get out of Afghanistan.

Clerk Kaufman retiring

Harris County Clerk Beverly Kaufman, a one-time Waller County farm girl who oversaw record-keeping and election functions of the nation's third largest county, announced Friday she will not seek a fifth term next year. ...

n 1994, Kaufman was appointed to fill an unexpired term as county clerk after the death of Molly Pryor, who had been appointed eight months earlier after the death of longtime clerk Anita Rodeheaver.

Duties of the county clerk include maintaining records for commissioners court, probate and civil courts; overseeing records of real property, tax liens and vital statistics, and supervising elections.

Congratulations and enjoy your retirement, Ms. Kaufman.

Let the speculation begin on her 2010 potential successors. Councilwoman and Vice Mayor Pro Tem (and DNC member) Sue Lovell is widely rumored to be interested in the post, though we likely won't hear anything about it from her until after the November municipal elections. Hector de Leon, Kaufman's director of communications and voter outreach, could have an interest; 2006 Clerk candidate and 2008 judicial candidate James Goodwille Pierre may as well.

Republicans will line up to replace Kaufman, too. Their ranks could include former and very temporary District Clerk, Theresa Chang; the man she replaced when he unsuccessfully challenged County Judge Ed Emmett, Charles Bacarisse; and Tom Moon, whose long record of both Republican activism and government service includes a stint working for both Kaufman and former tax assessor/collector Paul Bettencourt.

Dwayne Bohac and Ed Johnson probably have ruined their chances.

What names are you hearing bandied about, from either side of the aisle?

Update: Carl Whitmarsh advances the name of Sue Schechter.

MLB realllly needs instant replay

Jeff Passan:

On Friday night, a bad call might have cost the Minnesota Twins a chance to beat the New York Yankees on the road in their American League Division Series. In the 11th inning of Game 2, Minnesota catcher Joe Mauer sliced a ball down the left-field line that not only glanced off Melky Cabrera’s glove in fair territory but also bounced at least 6 inches inside the line and then into the stands for what should’ve been a ground-rule double. Umpire Phil Cuzzi, standing 10 feet away, called it foul. (See photo above.) And even though Mauer singled and the Twins managed to load the bases with no outs, they didn’t score, and the Yankees won 4-3 on a Mark Teixeira home run later that inning.

The Twins were here, of course, because of an umpiring error earlier in the week. A pitch glanced off the jersey of Detroit third baseman Brandon Inge with the bases loaded in the 12th inning of the Tigers’ one-game playoff with Minnesota. Umpire Randy Marsh didn’t call it. The Twins scored in the bottom half of the inning. Marsh claimed not to have seen the video, and MLB’s umpiring boss, Mike Port, said he stood by Marsh.

A pair of bad calls, one completely hideous, as all after-the-fact evidence easily reveals.

So that’s what baseball has come to: supporting egregious flubs to protect their own. It’s the epitome of an old-boys’ network, and it’s insulting to the game. MLB says it uses a grading system during the regular season that rewards the best umpires with playoff assignments. That alleged fair and impartial grading system, mind you, rewarded a postseason series to C.B. Bucknor, about whom a player once said: “My grandpa would be a better umpire than him. And my grandpa is dead.”

Bucknor, by the way, blew three calls at first base in Game 1 of the Red Sox-Angels series. Bungling one call is bad. Mangling two is unconscionable. Blowing three in a single game is fireable.

All of this, again, has happened within a half a week’s time. Two game-defining calls and three more that could have led to … well, no one knows. That’s a wall MLB hides behind: that even if Mauer were on second, who’s to say Jason Kubel and Michael Cuddyer would’ve followed with singles?

Baseball has to start getting these right.

Technology exists to ensure that such errors are rectified before they cost a team. If Cuzzi is willing to admit he’s wrong after the game – “There’s a guy sitting over in the umpire’s dressing room right now that feels horrible,” crew chief Tim Tschida said – then it behooves him and others to allow their calls to be vetted in-game. In no way does it subvert their authority. Players will respect their fallibility, a grand quality for so many who try to play god.

Take the cue from football. Use a red replay flag. Each team gets two per game. If the manager throws them too early, or misuses them, and can’t overturn a poor call later, it’s his mess. ... Accompanying the technology is the urgency. Nobody inside baseball wants a postseason defined by its umpiring screw-ups, and yet year after year, they happen. Ignoring the issue won’t make it go away.

Watch for the next blown call, and whether the outrage is sufficient to drive baseball out of the 19th century and into the 21st. Next season. Perhaps.

The human element. That’s the best argument purists muster against widespread instant replay in Major League Baseball. Let’s see how that works: Umpires make mistakes because they’re human, and ... that makes it OK! Somehow, it’s difficult to believe such reasoning would stand up in a court of law or, say, anywhere in the world not populated by baseball’s dopey decision makers who don’t understand that a huge integrity problem is about to smack them in the face.