Comments for The GW Blue Line http://blog.gwcollegedemocrats.com The official blog of GW College Democrats Sat, 13 Mar 2010 00:54:02 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 Comment on Climate Change: The Next Steps. by Sean Rourke http://blog.gwcollegedemocrats.com/2010/01/13/climate-change-the-next-steps/#comment-106 Sean Rourke Thu, 14 Jan 2010 01:03:20 +0000 http://blog.gwcollegedemocrats.com/?p=111#comment-106 Supposedly Obama's next initiative is green energy and "green-collar jobs" as soon as health care is taken care of. A lot of "green energy money" is supposed to be released within the next few months for small to mid-sized projects like the ones you described happening in Britain. Supposedly Obama’s next initiative is green energy and “green-collar jobs” as soon as health care is taken care of. A lot of “green energy money” is supposed to be released within the next few months for small to mid-sized projects like the ones you described happening in Britain.

]]> Comment on There is yet hope for health care by Dan Rozenson http://blog.gwcollegedemocrats.com/2009/10/19/there-is-yet-hope-for-health-care/#comment-98 Dan Rozenson Wed, 21 Oct 2009 03:36:00 +0000 http://blog.gwcollegedemocrats.com/?p=98#comment-98 It would be lovely to have everything we wanted in this bill, but settling for 80% is better than 0%. Klein made a great point yesterday: Usually when you negotiate, you start from a position where you demand the most and gradually increase the number of concessions until you and the other side find ground. <i>This approach does not work with the Republican Party</i>. They would be <i>more</i> than happy to scuttle any bill Obama throws out there. Ben Nelson's much the same way sometimes. You therefore bargain from a position of weakness out of necessity. It would be lovely to have everything we wanted in this bill, but settling for 80% is better than 0%. Klein made a great point yesterday: Usually when you negotiate, you start from a position where you demand the most and gradually increase the number of concessions until you and the other side find ground. This approach does not work with the Republican Party. They would be more than happy to scuttle any bill Obama throws out there. Ben Nelson’s much the same way sometimes. You therefore bargain from a position of weakness out of necessity.

]]> Comment on There is yet hope for health care by Annu Subramanian http://blog.gwcollegedemocrats.com/2009/10/19/there-is-yet-hope-for-health-care/#comment-97 Annu Subramanian Tue, 20 Oct 2009 04:01:17 +0000 http://blog.gwcollegedemocrats.com/?p=98#comment-97 Dan, you bring up a really good point about the cumbersome nature of the Senate and how that is negatively affecting the passage of the Obama's health care plan, but I disagree with the idea that we can make small allowances now in hopes of making up those gains in the future. While I do believe that progress is progress-- and when dealing with human lives, we'll take anything we can get-- it is wrong to go into this process with a plan to settle with or appease opponents. We should continue to demand health care as initially proposed. When it passes, it won't be seen as a compromised mission to achieve sixty yes votes but rather a victory over our crumbling health care system and a demonstration of our President and the nation's dedication to effectively resolving this major, time-sensitive issue. Dan, you bring up a really good point about the cumbersome nature of the Senate and how that is negatively affecting the passage of the Obama’s health care plan, but I disagree with the idea that we can make small allowances now in hopes of making up those gains in the future. While I do believe that progress is progress– and when dealing with human lives, we’ll take anything we can get– it is wrong to go into this process with a plan to settle with or appease opponents. We should continue to demand health care as initially proposed. When it passes, it won’t be seen as a compromised mission to achieve sixty yes votes but rather a victory over our crumbling health care system and a demonstration of our President and the nation’s dedication to effectively resolving this major, time-sensitive issue.

]]> Comment on Biden Bites Back by Dan Rozenson http://blog.gwcollegedemocrats.com/2009/10/18/biden-bites-back/#comment-96 Dan Rozenson Mon, 19 Oct 2009 02:54:22 +0000 http://blog.gwcollegedemocrats.com/?p=97#comment-96 http://gwdiscourse.com/2009/10/14/explaining-the-biden-shift-on-afpak/ http://gwdiscourse.com/2009/10/14/explaining-the-biden-shift-on-afpak/

]]> Comment on Minority Rights vs. The Public by annu1004 http://blog.gwcollegedemocrats.com/2009/10/09/minority-rights-vs-the-public/#comment-91 annu1004 Thu, 15 Oct 2009 00:49:43 +0000 http://blog.gwcollegedemocrats.com/?p=86#comment-91 Thank you for this. Basic human rights should not be up for deliberation. Thank you for this. Basic human rights should not be up for deliberation.

]]> Comment on Bob Wexler: Ambassador to Israel? by Michael Garber http://blog.gwcollegedemocrats.com/2009/10/13/bob-wexler-ambassador-to-israel/#comment-90 Michael Garber Wed, 14 Oct 2009 03:02:47 +0000 http://blog.gwcollegedemocrats.com/?p=92#comment-90 More info - http://jta.org/trackback/1008492/ Apparently he's leaving to head this organization, the Center for Middle East Peace and Economic Cooperation. Interesting choice on the Congressman's part... More info - http://jta.org/trackback/1008492/

Apparently he’s leaving to head this organization, the Center for Middle East Peace and Economic Cooperation. Interesting choice on the Congressman’s part…

]]> Comment on Bob Wexler: Ambassador to Israel? by Michael Garber http://blog.gwcollegedemocrats.com/2009/10/13/bob-wexler-ambassador-to-israel/#comment-89 Michael Garber Wed, 14 Oct 2009 02:20:30 +0000 http://blog.gwcollegedemocrats.com/?p=92#comment-89 How is that really related to Israel? According to initial reports, this is a policy position related to the Middle East... hence why I think it's possible that he'll be Ambassador to Israel, a position not yet filled. Do you have any additional information on this? I see <a href="http://www.tampabay.com/news/politics/stateroundup/us-rep-wexler-expected-to-step-down-from-south-florida-seat/1043794" rel="nofollow">this article</a> mentioning USAID, but it also refutes that... How is that really related to Israel? According to initial reports, this is a policy position related to the Middle East… hence why I think it’s possible that he’ll be Ambassador to Israel, a position not yet filled. Do you have any additional information on this? I see this article mentioning USAID, but it also refutes that…

]]> Comment on Bob Wexler: Ambassador to Israel? by Brian Dittmeier http://blog.gwcollegedemocrats.com/2009/10/13/bob-wexler-ambassador-to-israel/#comment-88 Brian Dittmeier Wed, 14 Oct 2009 02:02:30 +0000 http://blog.gwcollegedemocrats.com/?p=92#comment-88 He's getting directorship of USAID. He’s getting directorship of USAID.

]]> Comment on The Indian Example by maxrit http://blog.gwcollegedemocrats.com/2009/10/13/the-indian-example/#comment-87 maxrit Wed, 14 Oct 2009 01:34:09 +0000 http://blog.gwcollegedemocrats.com/?p=88#comment-87 The extremely handsome author makes some clear points about the needs to focus on a fundamental restructuring of our policy towards Afghani civilians and civilian-infrastructure. However: I wonder if the retributive impulse that he describes as part of the Afghani hospitality culture isn't simply a more general facet of human nature. The concept goes back to Hammurabi's code and the earliest organizing principles behind the meting out of justice. I'm not sure if the retributive impulse should be understood as an anthropological idiosyncrasy in the Afghani people or rather a general political-scientific phenomenon that all leaders, at all times, must consider before they step into other countries. Was not, in fact, the Afghani invasion itself an example of this retributive impulse? Another issue I have is the author's assumption that most terrorists and insurgents grow as a direct response to American injustices in the region. While this obviously influences the ease of recruitment in terrorist organizations, and helps along their cause-- leaders of these groups seem to focus on ideological and historical grievancess dating back to the repulsion of the Muslims from Spain in the 1400's and general notions of Western repression that couldn't be influenced without a wholesale restructuring of the current economic and religious systems of the world. To suggest that terror groups would dry up if all was hunky-dory in Afghanistan is appealing, but the majority of money funding those groups does not come from the disgruntled, but rather from an elite with idealogical, religious, and historical grievances to air. And vast numbers of recruits come form the porous Pakistani tribal regions --so unless we decide to restructure that area as well and load it up with public works, there will still be plenty of foot-soldiers in their armies. The extremely handsome author makes some clear points about the needs to focus on a fundamental restructuring of our policy towards Afghani civilians and civilian-infrastructure.
However: I wonder if the retributive impulse that he describes as part of the Afghani hospitality culture isn’t simply a more general facet of human nature. The concept goes back to Hammurabi’s code and the earliest organizing principles behind the meting out of justice. I’m not sure if the retributive impulse should be understood as an anthropological idiosyncrasy in the Afghani people or rather a general political-scientific phenomenon that all leaders, at all times, must consider before they step into other countries. Was not, in fact, the Afghani invasion itself an example of this retributive impulse?

Another issue I have is the author’s assumption that most terrorists and insurgents grow as a direct response to American injustices in the region. While this obviously influences the ease of recruitment in terrorist organizations, and helps along their cause– leaders of these groups seem to focus on ideological and historical grievancess dating back to the repulsion of the Muslims from Spain in the 1400’s and general notions of Western repression that couldn’t be influenced without a wholesale restructuring of the current economic and religious systems of the world. To suggest that terror groups would dry up if all was hunky-dory in Afghanistan is appealing, but the majority of money funding those groups does not come from the disgruntled, but rather from an elite with idealogical, religious, and historical grievances to air. And vast numbers of recruits come form the porous Pakistani tribal regions –so unless we decide to restructure that area as well and load it up with public works, there will still be plenty of foot-soldiers in their armies.

]]> Comment on On Winning a Nobel Peace Prize by adetsch http://blog.gwcollegedemocrats.com/2009/10/09/on-winning-a-nobel-peace-prize/#comment-86 adetsch Mon, 12 Oct 2009 18:06:54 +0000 http://blog.gwcollegedemocrats.com/?p=84#comment-86 In nine months as Commander-in-Chief, Obama has done much to advance American multilateralism and diplomacy. As Michael said above, Obama has been universally exalted around the world by everyone from Moammar Qaddafi to Gordon Brown. That's not only because he isn't George W. Bush, but because he has already established himself as an international leader with appearances at G-20 summits and the UN, cooling tensions with calm and steady control, and setting a clear agenda to advance peace, security and economic stability around the Globe. Still, it seems a bit inappropriate to be awarding President Obama the Nobel Peace Prize, especially at this specific point in history. As Matt and Michael vaguely hinted, this great promise could be masked by the mounting conflict in Afghanistan. Obama must soon decide how to move forward in the counter-insurgency effort. None of the options available are easy, and any one of them could invariably lead to a Vietnam-sized quagmire. It has already been a bloody summer, and it may only get worse. In nine months as Commander-in-Chief, Obama has done much to advance American multilateralism and diplomacy. As Michael said above, Obama has been universally exalted around the world by everyone from Moammar Qaddafi to Gordon Brown. That’s not only because he isn’t George W. Bush, but because he has already established himself as an international leader with appearances at G-20 summits and the UN, cooling tensions with calm and steady control, and setting a clear agenda to advance peace, security and economic stability around the Globe.

Still, it seems a bit inappropriate to be awarding President Obama the Nobel Peace Prize, especially at this specific point in history. As Matt and Michael vaguely hinted, this great promise could be masked by the mounting conflict in Afghanistan. Obama must soon decide how to move forward in the counter-insurgency effort. None of the options available are easy, and any one of them could invariably lead to a Vietnam-sized quagmire. It has already been a bloody summer, and it may only get worse.

]]>