PJ: Playing politics with women's reproductive rights is a long fought battle in the US. It is sad that those political pressures, through their blind desire to demonize one women's health organization may have put under-privilaged women at risk of not receiving life-saving cancer screening. But through the generosity of New York's Mayor Bloomberg, Planned Parenthood will make up the shortfall that it desperately needs to help these women.
The Guardian
Bloomberg offers $250,000 to Planned Parenthood to make up funds shortfall
New York mayor steps in after leading cancer charity withdrew funds amid claims it was under pressure from pro-life groups
By Karen McVeigh
New York mayor Michael Bloomberg has entered the controversy over America's largest breast cancer advocacy group's cut in funding to Planned Parenthood by vowing to make up $250,000 of the missing funds out of his own pocket.
A furious row raged this week over a decision by Susan G Komen for the Cure, the group behind the Pink Ribbon campaign, to cut its long-term funding for a Planned Parenthood project to screen disadvantaged women for breast cancer.
In a statement, Bloomberg said: "Politics have no place in health care. Breast cancer screening saves lives and hundreds of thousands of women rely on Planned Parenthood for access to care. We should be helping women access that care, not placing barriers in their way."
Planned Parenthood, the largest reproductive and sexual health service provider in the US, provides screenings for cervical, breast cancer, sexually transmitted diseases and HIV/Aids. It is also widely known to help women access abortions and contraception.
The row escalated on Thursday after it emerged that one leading health official for Komen resigned over the $650,000 funding cut, amid reports that it had caved in to the anti-abortion right.
Cecile Richards, the President of Planned Parenthood Federation of America, said in a statement: "On behalf of hundreds of thousands of women nation wide who rely on Planned Parenthood for breast cancer education and screening, we are enormously grateful to mayor Bloomberg. This contribution will help ensure that politics don't interfere with women having access to health care.
"People all across the country have stepped forward in the last 48 hours to offer help and support, and the Mayor's donation will help ensure that no woman is denied breast cancer services because of right-wing political pressure campaigns."
Bloomberg said he would donate $1 for every new dollar Planned Parenthood raised up to $250,000.
Komen says it made the cut because of a newly-adopted rule preventing it from funding any group under congressional investigation. Planned Parenthood is currently the subject of an investigation by Cliff Stearns, an anti-abortion Republican congressman from Florida, to find out if has spent public money on abortions.
However, a report in the Atlantic quoting "sources with direct knowledge of the Komen decision-making" process said the new rule was created only in order to provide an excuse to cut off Planned Parenthood.
The website reports that the rule was driven by the organisation's new senior vice-president for public policy, Karen Handel. Handel, who ran unsuccessfully for governor of Georgia is staunchly anti-abortion.
Former communications advisor to Komen, John Hammarley, told the Atlantic that Komen's top health official, Mollie Williams, resigned in protest immediately following the decision.
"Mollie is one of the most highly respected and ethical people inside the organisation, and she felt she couldn't continue under these conditions," Hammarley said. "The Komen board of directors are very politically savvy folks, and I think over time they thought if they gave in to the very aggressive propaganda machine of the anti-abortion groups, that the issue would go away. It seemed very short-sighted to me."
In a statement sent to the Atlantic, Mollie Williams said she was saddened by the divide between Komen and Planned Parenthood.
Williams, who said she could not respond to questions due to a duty of confidentiality towards her former employer, said: "I have dedicated my career to fighting for the rights of the marginalised and underserved. And I believe it would be a mistake for any organisation to bow to political pressure and compromise its mission."
She expressed a deep admiration for the work of Komen and the work of Planned Parenthood, adding: "The divide between these two very important organisations saddens me. I am hopeful their passionate and courageous leaders, Nancy Brinker and Cecile Richards, can swiftly resolve this conflict in a manner that benefits the women they both serve."
Terry O'Neill, president of the National Organisation for Women, said she had "no doubt" that the rule was manufactured to cut off funding and described it as "offensive and rapidly anti-women".
"The investigation itself is being read by an individual ideologically opposed to women having access to reproductive health care. Planned Parenthood provides cervical screening, breast screening, screening for sexually transmitted infection, screening for HIV/Aids. It saved lives."
"The investigation is bogus and politically motivated. Now you have a bogus politically motivated investigation being used as a pretext for a bogus politically motivated decision by Susan G Komen. Susan G Komen is stepping off the cliff with this decision. It should itself be de-funded."
A statement on Komen's website to "set the record straight" denied that the new rules were politically motivated. It said that the new rule was introduced as part of a strengthening of eligibility criteria.
It said: "We are dismayed and extremely disappointed that actions we have taken to strengthen our granting process have been widely mischaracterised."
"Starting in 2010, Komen began an initiative to help us do a better job of measuring the impact of community grants. This is important because we invest significant dollars in our local community programs – $93 million in 2011, which provided for 700,000 breast health screenings and diagnostic procedures.
"Following this review, we made the decision to implement stronger performance criteria for our grantees to minimise duplication and free up dollars for direct services to help vulnerable women. To support this new granting strategy, Komen has also implemented more stringent eligibility standards to safeguard donor dollars. Consequently, some organisations are no longer eligible to receive Komen grants.
It added: "We regret that these new policies have impacted some longstanding grantees, such as Planned Parenthood, but want to be absolutely clear that our grant-making decisions are not about politics. Throughout our 30 year history, our priority has always been and will continue to be the women we serve. As we move forward, we are working to ensure that there is no interruption or gaps in services for the women who need our support most in the fight against breast cancer."
A report last year on FactCheck.org said that 3% of Planned Parenthood's services were abortions and 10% of its clients received abortions.
The Komen grant in question, for $680,000, went to 19 of Planned Parenthood's branches to pay for breast screenings for disadvantaged women.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/feb/02/susan-g-komen-planned-parenthood-rule
Thursday, February 2, 2012
Australia: The art of charisma
PJ: Kennedy had it; Clinton had it; Bill Gates got it....
The Sydney Morning Herald
Lessons in charisma
They say "you either got it, or you don't," but when it comes to leading with charisma - you can learn it.
According to Olivia Fox Cabane's book The Charisma Myth: How Anyone Can Master the Art and Science of Personal Magnetism, people aren't born charismatic. They acquire it through knowledge and practice.
With charisma, you'll become more influential, persuasive and inspiring. People will become magnetically drawn to you, trust you, want to learn from you.
Charismatic leaders "cause followers to become highly committed to the leader's mission, to make significant personal sacrifices, and to perform above and beyond the call of duty," says Robert House, a Wharton School business professor.
Advertisement: Story continues below
We've compiled the most interesting points to help you rise to the top of your game.
They say "you either got it, or you don't," but when it comes to charisma, you don't have to have it — you can learn it.
According to Olivia Fox Cabane's book The Charisma Myth: How Anyone Can Master the Art and Science of Personal Magnetism, people aren't born charismatic. They acquire it through knowledge and practice.
With charisma, you'll become more influential, persuasive and inspiring. People will become magnetically drawn to you, trust you, want to learn from you.
Charismatic leaders "cause followers to become highly committed to the leader's mission, to make significant personal sacrifices, and to perform above and beyond the call of duty," says Robert House, a Wharton School business professor.
We've compiled the most interesting points to help you rise to the top of your game.
1. You don't have to be the most attractive person in the room.
Yes, we all agree that being attractive certainly has its advantages, but it's definitely not a requirement.
Winston Churchill wasn't a sex symbol, but he's still considered one of the most influential leaders in history.
2. Make people feel like they're the most intelligent, impressive and fascinating person in the room.
3. To make someone feel as if they're the only person that matters, do these three things during conversations:
To make someone feel as if they're the only person that matters, do these three things during conversations:
- Lower the intonation of your voice at the end of sentences.
- Reduce how quickly and often you nod.
- Pause for two full seconds before speaking.
4. Your presence should always be present.
A study conducted by Harvard professor Daniel Gilbert estimated that 46.9% of the mind is spent "wandering."
"Being present means simply having a moment-to-moment awareness of what's happening. It means paying attention to what's going on rather than being caught up in your thoughts."
In the middle of a conversation, if your mind is somewhere else, your eyes will glaze over and you'll start making facial expressions not typical to a person listening. And your companions will notice.
5. Think of something pleasant so you appear sincere.
A study conducted by Harvard professor Daniel Gilbert estimated that 46.9% of the mind is spent "wandering."
"Being present means simply having a moment-to-moment awareness of what's happening. It means paying attention to what's going on rather than being caught up in your thoughts."
In the middle of a conversation, if your mind is somewhere else, your eyes will glaze over and you'll start making facial expressions not typical to a person listening. And your companions will notice.
6. To appear more open and inviting, rise if you're sitting to be similar heights and keep your hands out of you pockets when you shake someone's hand.
7. Make sure you have the right handshake.
The right handshake will do more for you than an expensive suit will. Can you imagine someone powerful with a weak, limp, awkward handshake? Probably not.
Here are the worst of them:
- The Dead Fish. This happens when one hand is extended into another, but there is barely any movement.
- The Knuckle Cruncher. This happens when there's too much force. The violator is usually someone who doesn't know their own strength or someone who is trying to prove that they should be taken seriously.
- The Dominant. This happens when the hand's palm is extended down, which symbolises the offender having the "upper hand." The opposite of this is "The Twisting Dominant," which is where the hand is normal at first, but then twists to gain the upper hand once contact is made.
- The two-handed, or the Politician's Handshake. This happens when the other person uses their free hand to cover the handshake, the other person's wrist, arm and shoulder.
8. Become an excellent listener by deliberately pausing and asking questions.
John F. Kennedy was known as a "superb listener" who made others feel like he was "with them completely."
When most of us are trying to show that we're listening, we typically wait for someone to be done speaking before we start. This is not a suficient method. Instead, ask them questions. If you're truly not interested, it will show on your face that you're secretly waiting for your turn to speak.
9. Choose your seat carefully around a table.
This decision will influence the outcome of the entire negotiation.
When people sit across from one another with a table separating them, they tend to argue more and speak in shorter sentences. If you want to avoid confrontation, sit next to the person or at a 90-degree angle from them.
Also avoid seating them with their back to an open space, especially if there is a lot of commotion going on behind them.
10. Don't compare yourself to others.
It's in our nature to compare ourselves to others, but if you're criticising yourself, "the threat response impairs analytic thinking, creative insight, and problem solving," says David Rock, the founder of the NeuroLeadership Institute.
This affects us personally, but also affects how others perceive us.
11. Combine your power with warmth to create a full, charismatic package.
To show that you're powerful, you don't have to physically have great strength - you can achieve this status by maintaining a strong persona, such as displaying intelligence, like Bill Gates, or kindness, like the Dalai Lama.
When you increase your level of power, your charisma level also increases, but it's best to combine this with warmth so you don't appear too cold or dictatorial.
12. Don't let self-doubt affect your persona.
In 1978, Georgia State University professors identified that the "imposter syndrome" affected 70% of the population at one point or another.
This will create self-doubt as if you're just waiting for someone to expose you as a fraud. This kind of effect will make you appear untruthful and unsure of yourself.
13. Recognise what the problems are and fix them.
For example, if you're wearing clothes that are too tight, it will physically show that you're uncomfortable, but your companions will think you appear disengaged and untruthful.
14. When you're dealing with a difficult group of people, divide them up, then conquer.
15. Make time to warm-up before a big event.
When it's important that you're charismatic, make sure you fit in a warm-up period that allows you to gradually ramp up to the level you want.
You wouldn't run a marathon without warming-up or give a speech without practicing so don't think you can simply be charismatic on the spot. Get in the mental state of warmth and power by taking part in an activity beforehand that makes you happy.
If running calms you, then make time for this or simply listen to your favourite music before an important meeting. Make sure the playlist has songs with themes of self-confidence, warmth, empathy, and patience.
16. Intentionally put yourself in uncomfortable situations so that you can deal with internal discomfort more effectively.
Intentionally put yourself in uncomfortable situations so that you can deal with internal discomfort more effectively
17. Know that there are different charisma styles.
You can choose different styles based on your own personality and situation. Whatever you do, don't force it or you'll end up seeming unauthentic.
Here are the different styles:
- Focus. This style is based on the perception of presence. Adopt this when you want people to feel like they're the only ones in the room with you.
- Visionary. This kind of style makes other people feel inspired and appearance matters far less than with any other style.
- Kindness. This kind of charisma comes from body language and is based mostly on warmth. However, if you don't combine this with some authoritative skills, you'll come off as too overeager to please.
- Authority. This is the most powerful charisma style of them all and those who acquire it are not likeable all the time. We evaluate this power through four indicators: body language, appearance, title and reactions of others.
http://www.smh.com.au/executive-style/management/lessons-in--charisma-20120202-1qv32.html
The Sydney Morning Herald
Lessons in charisma
They say "you either got it, or you don't," but when it comes to leading with charisma - you can learn it.
According to Olivia Fox Cabane's book The Charisma Myth: How Anyone Can Master the Art and Science of Personal Magnetism, people aren't born charismatic. They acquire it through knowledge and practice.
With charisma, you'll become more influential, persuasive and inspiring. People will become magnetically drawn to you, trust you, want to learn from you.
Charismatic leaders "cause followers to become highly committed to the leader's mission, to make significant personal sacrifices, and to perform above and beyond the call of duty," says Robert House, a Wharton School business professor.
Advertisement: Story continues below
We've compiled the most interesting points to help you rise to the top of your game.
They say "you either got it, or you don't," but when it comes to charisma, you don't have to have it — you can learn it.
According to Olivia Fox Cabane's book The Charisma Myth: How Anyone Can Master the Art and Science of Personal Magnetism, people aren't born charismatic. They acquire it through knowledge and practice.
With charisma, you'll become more influential, persuasive and inspiring. People will become magnetically drawn to you, trust you, want to learn from you.
Charismatic leaders "cause followers to become highly committed to the leader's mission, to make significant personal sacrifices, and to perform above and beyond the call of duty," says Robert House, a Wharton School business professor.
We've compiled the most interesting points to help you rise to the top of your game.
1. You don't have to be the most attractive person in the room.
Yes, we all agree that being attractive certainly has its advantages, but it's definitely not a requirement.
Winston Churchill wasn't a sex symbol, but he's still considered one of the most influential leaders in history.
2. Make people feel like they're the most intelligent, impressive and fascinating person in the room.
3. To make someone feel as if they're the only person that matters, do these three things during conversations:
To make someone feel as if they're the only person that matters, do these three things during conversations:
- Lower the intonation of your voice at the end of sentences.
- Reduce how quickly and often you nod.
- Pause for two full seconds before speaking.
4. Your presence should always be present.
A study conducted by Harvard professor Daniel Gilbert estimated that 46.9% of the mind is spent "wandering."
"Being present means simply having a moment-to-moment awareness of what's happening. It means paying attention to what's going on rather than being caught up in your thoughts."
In the middle of a conversation, if your mind is somewhere else, your eyes will glaze over and you'll start making facial expressions not typical to a person listening. And your companions will notice.
5. Think of something pleasant so you appear sincere.
A study conducted by Harvard professor Daniel Gilbert estimated that 46.9% of the mind is spent "wandering."
"Being present means simply having a moment-to-moment awareness of what's happening. It means paying attention to what's going on rather than being caught up in your thoughts."
In the middle of a conversation, if your mind is somewhere else, your eyes will glaze over and you'll start making facial expressions not typical to a person listening. And your companions will notice.
6. To appear more open and inviting, rise if you're sitting to be similar heights and keep your hands out of you pockets when you shake someone's hand.
7. Make sure you have the right handshake.
The right handshake will do more for you than an expensive suit will. Can you imagine someone powerful with a weak, limp, awkward handshake? Probably not.
Here are the worst of them:
- The Dead Fish. This happens when one hand is extended into another, but there is barely any movement.
- The Knuckle Cruncher. This happens when there's too much force. The violator is usually someone who doesn't know their own strength or someone who is trying to prove that they should be taken seriously.
- The Dominant. This happens when the hand's palm is extended down, which symbolises the offender having the "upper hand." The opposite of this is "The Twisting Dominant," which is where the hand is normal at first, but then twists to gain the upper hand once contact is made.
- The two-handed, or the Politician's Handshake. This happens when the other person uses their free hand to cover the handshake, the other person's wrist, arm and shoulder.
8. Become an excellent listener by deliberately pausing and asking questions.
John F. Kennedy was known as a "superb listener" who made others feel like he was "with them completely."
When most of us are trying to show that we're listening, we typically wait for someone to be done speaking before we start. This is not a suficient method. Instead, ask them questions. If you're truly not interested, it will show on your face that you're secretly waiting for your turn to speak.
9. Choose your seat carefully around a table.
This decision will influence the outcome of the entire negotiation.
When people sit across from one another with a table separating them, they tend to argue more and speak in shorter sentences. If you want to avoid confrontation, sit next to the person or at a 90-degree angle from them.
Also avoid seating them with their back to an open space, especially if there is a lot of commotion going on behind them.
10. Don't compare yourself to others.
It's in our nature to compare ourselves to others, but if you're criticising yourself, "the threat response impairs analytic thinking, creative insight, and problem solving," says David Rock, the founder of the NeuroLeadership Institute.
This affects us personally, but also affects how others perceive us.
11. Combine your power with warmth to create a full, charismatic package.
To show that you're powerful, you don't have to physically have great strength - you can achieve this status by maintaining a strong persona, such as displaying intelligence, like Bill Gates, or kindness, like the Dalai Lama.
When you increase your level of power, your charisma level also increases, but it's best to combine this with warmth so you don't appear too cold or dictatorial.
12. Don't let self-doubt affect your persona.
In 1978, Georgia State University professors identified that the "imposter syndrome" affected 70% of the population at one point or another.
This will create self-doubt as if you're just waiting for someone to expose you as a fraud. This kind of effect will make you appear untruthful and unsure of yourself.
13. Recognise what the problems are and fix them.
For example, if you're wearing clothes that are too tight, it will physically show that you're uncomfortable, but your companions will think you appear disengaged and untruthful.
14. When you're dealing with a difficult group of people, divide them up, then conquer.
15. Make time to warm-up before a big event.
When it's important that you're charismatic, make sure you fit in a warm-up period that allows you to gradually ramp up to the level you want.
You wouldn't run a marathon without warming-up or give a speech without practicing so don't think you can simply be charismatic on the spot. Get in the mental state of warmth and power by taking part in an activity beforehand that makes you happy.
If running calms you, then make time for this or simply listen to your favourite music before an important meeting. Make sure the playlist has songs with themes of self-confidence, warmth, empathy, and patience.
16. Intentionally put yourself in uncomfortable situations so that you can deal with internal discomfort more effectively.
Intentionally put yourself in uncomfortable situations so that you can deal with internal discomfort more effectively
17. Know that there are different charisma styles.
You can choose different styles based on your own personality and situation. Whatever you do, don't force it or you'll end up seeming unauthentic.
Here are the different styles:
- Focus. This style is based on the perception of presence. Adopt this when you want people to feel like they're the only ones in the room with you.
- Visionary. This kind of style makes other people feel inspired and appearance matters far less than with any other style.
- Kindness. This kind of charisma comes from body language and is based mostly on warmth. However, if you don't combine this with some authoritative skills, you'll come off as too overeager to please.
- Authority. This is the most powerful charisma style of them all and those who acquire it are not likeable all the time. We evaluate this power through four indicators: body language, appearance, title and reactions of others.
http://www.smh.com.au/executive-style/management/lessons-in--charisma-20120202-1qv32.html
UK: Romney's "unimpressive romp"
The Economist
Mitt Romney's campaign
Fit for fighting?
Feb 1st 2012, 17:09 by R.L.G.
I WROTE before the South Carolina primary that I thought it basically impossible that Mitt Romney could lose the primaries. This didn't require great skill on my part, of course, but now the conclusion is nigh-universal.
So have we found a humming Mitt Romney machine, funded, skilled, disciplined, having won Florida by 14 points and ready to fight the general election? I am far from convinced. The analysis that follows is from the most biased possible source. But I find it hard to argue with.
Team Romney wants voters and the national media to believe its victory reflects its candidate’s positions. In reality, it is a product of the fact that Romney and his SuperPAC allies carpet-bombed Gingrich by spending five times as much money on Florida’s airwaves, and running more than 60 television ads for every one Gingrich and his allies aired. Nearly all of the $15.3 million Romney’s campaign and its allies’ spent on advertising in Florida was focused not on their own candidate, but on the rest of a weak field of opponents, contributing to a campaign in which more than nine out of every 10 ads were negative – by far the most negative campaign in Florida’s history.
It’s difficult for Romney to claim Floridians voted for him rather than against his opponents, since less than one-tenth of one percent of the ads in Florida promoted Romney positively. In fact, a single Spanish radio spot was the only positive Romney ad in the entire state during the last week of the primary, and more Floridians reported in exit polls that Romney ran the most unfair campaign.
This came in my morning e-mail from the Obama campaign. Normally I'd skim and delete, but it struck me with the important reminder: Mr Romney has run a decent campaign, but only against an extraordinarily bad field—a field more Republicans call "fair" or "poor" than "good" or "excellent". So Mr Romney has pasted one on Newt Gingrich. Remember that this is still Newt Gingrich, a man drummed out of office more than a decade ago, whose campaign has been left for dead twice, who cruised around Greece while his team floundered, whose negatives are higher than Emperor Palpatine's, who's on a third marriage, who supported a health-insurance mandate, and greenhouse-gas action alongside Nancy Pelosi, who made $1.6m for helping the loathed Freddie Mac, and on and on. So Mr Romney had $15m lying around to defeat this man in a single state? Well, congratulations, Mr Romney, as far as it goes. (That's more than Mr Gingrich could say to his rival.) But it's a good thing you don't drink, because you don't have a time for a celebration-induced hangover. There's much work to be done to defeat Barack Obama.
For most of the primaries, Mr Romney has been running as though in the general election. He talks vastly more about Mr Obama than his rivals. Only Mr Gingrich has taunted him successfully into fighting back, and then, only temporarily. He stands on the stump or at the debating podium carefully repeating his Obama attack-lines, and this has served him well as his rivals have tanked one after the other. But soon he will be facing a rather more formidable figure than Rick Santorum or Michele Bachmann. Mr Obama is the president of the United States, whose every move generates "earned media". He is a decent debater and a seasoned campaigner. He can still give a stump speech far better than anyone in the Republican field. Mr Romney's canned lines about "apologising for America" and "fighting a war on religion" and—last night's new one—"demonising nearly every sector of the American economy", work reasonably well when unrebutted in front of a crowd of fervid partisans. They will not work so well when Mr Obama gets round to rebutting them as his full-time job, which will not be long in coming.
In other words, we've seen that Mr Romney can win a primary, but that tells us next to nothing. Newt Gingrich is no Hillary Clinton. We've also seen a long preview of Mr Romney's general-election campaign, and what we've learned is that he can defeat Fantasy Barack Obama in a walk. Good luck with that. I certainly hope Mr Romney gives Actual Barack Obama a spirited and tough fight. But nothing in his unimpressive romp so far makes me sure that he will.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2012/02/mitt-romneys-campaign
Mitt Romney's campaign
Fit for fighting?
Feb 1st 2012, 17:09 by R.L.G.
I WROTE before the South Carolina primary that I thought it basically impossible that Mitt Romney could lose the primaries. This didn't require great skill on my part, of course, but now the conclusion is nigh-universal.
So have we found a humming Mitt Romney machine, funded, skilled, disciplined, having won Florida by 14 points and ready to fight the general election? I am far from convinced. The analysis that follows is from the most biased possible source. But I find it hard to argue with.
Team Romney wants voters and the national media to believe its victory reflects its candidate’s positions. In reality, it is a product of the fact that Romney and his SuperPAC allies carpet-bombed Gingrich by spending five times as much money on Florida’s airwaves, and running more than 60 television ads for every one Gingrich and his allies aired. Nearly all of the $15.3 million Romney’s campaign and its allies’ spent on advertising in Florida was focused not on their own candidate, but on the rest of a weak field of opponents, contributing to a campaign in which more than nine out of every 10 ads were negative – by far the most negative campaign in Florida’s history.
It’s difficult for Romney to claim Floridians voted for him rather than against his opponents, since less than one-tenth of one percent of the ads in Florida promoted Romney positively. In fact, a single Spanish radio spot was the only positive Romney ad in the entire state during the last week of the primary, and more Floridians reported in exit polls that Romney ran the most unfair campaign.
This came in my morning e-mail from the Obama campaign. Normally I'd skim and delete, but it struck me with the important reminder: Mr Romney has run a decent campaign, but only against an extraordinarily bad field—a field more Republicans call "fair" or "poor" than "good" or "excellent". So Mr Romney has pasted one on Newt Gingrich. Remember that this is still Newt Gingrich, a man drummed out of office more than a decade ago, whose campaign has been left for dead twice, who cruised around Greece while his team floundered, whose negatives are higher than Emperor Palpatine's, who's on a third marriage, who supported a health-insurance mandate, and greenhouse-gas action alongside Nancy Pelosi, who made $1.6m for helping the loathed Freddie Mac, and on and on. So Mr Romney had $15m lying around to defeat this man in a single state? Well, congratulations, Mr Romney, as far as it goes. (That's more than Mr Gingrich could say to his rival.) But it's a good thing you don't drink, because you don't have a time for a celebration-induced hangover. There's much work to be done to defeat Barack Obama.
For most of the primaries, Mr Romney has been running as though in the general election. He talks vastly more about Mr Obama than his rivals. Only Mr Gingrich has taunted him successfully into fighting back, and then, only temporarily. He stands on the stump or at the debating podium carefully repeating his Obama attack-lines, and this has served him well as his rivals have tanked one after the other. But soon he will be facing a rather more formidable figure than Rick Santorum or Michele Bachmann. Mr Obama is the president of the United States, whose every move generates "earned media". He is a decent debater and a seasoned campaigner. He can still give a stump speech far better than anyone in the Republican field. Mr Romney's canned lines about "apologising for America" and "fighting a war on religion" and—last night's new one—"demonising nearly every sector of the American economy", work reasonably well when unrebutted in front of a crowd of fervid partisans. They will not work so well when Mr Obama gets round to rebutting them as his full-time job, which will not be long in coming.
In other words, we've seen that Mr Romney can win a primary, but that tells us next to nothing. Newt Gingrich is no Hillary Clinton. We've also seen a long preview of Mr Romney's general-election campaign, and what we've learned is that he can defeat Fantasy Barack Obama in a walk. Good luck with that. I certainly hope Mr Romney gives Actual Barack Obama a spirited and tough fight. But nothing in his unimpressive romp so far makes me sure that he will.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2012/02/mitt-romneys-campaign
Turkey: Romney and Gingrich continue to duke it out
Hurriyet Daily News
Romney stumbles as Gingrich eyes Trump boost
Agence France- Presse
Republican White House frontrunner Mitt Romney stumbled a day after his Florida triumph with a gaffe about poor Americans, while rival Newt Gingrich eyed a boost Thursday from Donald Trump.
Populist real estate tycoon and reality TV star Trump, who flirted with running for the presidency himself last year, was expected to throw his weight behind Gingrich at a "major announcement" in Las Vegas.
Both Republican frontrunner candidates headed from Florida to the western battleground state of Nevada a day after Romney soundly defeated Gingrich in the Sunshine State, retaking the lead in the White House nomination race.
But the multi-millionaire former Massachusetts governor triggered immediate criticism for a controversial comment about America's poorest citizens, which threatened to slow his momentum.
"I'm not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. If it needs repair, I'll fix it," said Romney, a wealthy businessman who last week acknowledged earning $20 million in 2010.
"I'm not concerned about the very rich, they're doing just fine," the former venture capital boss told CNN. "I'm concerned about the very heart of America, the 90-95 percent of Americans who right now are struggling." The remarks came as the race for the right to take on Democratic President Barack Obama in November widened into more states, and were quickly seized upon by his opponents.
Gingrich, who lost to Romney by more than 14 percentage points in Florida, fired back at his rival.
"I am fed up with politicians in either party dividing Americans against each other. I am running to be president of all the American people and I am concerned about all of the American people," Gingrich said in Nevada.
Romney swiftly tried to explain his remarks, telling reporters traveling with him on his plane that they should consider everything he said, rather than just part of the sentence.
"Of course I'm concerned about all Americans... poor, wealthy, middle class, but the focus of my effort will be on middle income families who I think have been most hurt by the Obama economy," he said later.
At a campaign stop in Las Vegas on Wednesday evening Romney was back on track, drawing cheers with his usual stump speech and taking digs at Obama's policies, including his backing for "European-style" health care.
Romney also attacked the "naivety" of an announcement Wednesday by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta that the US plans to end its combat mission in Afghanistan in 2013, one year before most US troops are due to withdraw.
"Why in the world do you go to the people that you're fighting with, and tell them the day you're pulling out your troops? It makes absolutely no sense," he told hundreds of supporters in a suburban Vegas warehouse.
On Thursday all eyes will be on Trump, who scheduled an announcement for 12:30 pm (2030 GMT) -- which the New York Times and other media said would be an endorsement for Gingrich.
Public backing from Trump, host of the popular celebrity version of reality TV show "The Apprentice," could give the former House speaker a higher media profile and aid him in fundraising.
Gingrich has been endorsed by ex-candidate Herman Cain, and former Alaska governor Sarah Palin had urged Florida voters to back him in order to extend the contest, a sign of his support among the ultra-conservative Tea Party.
However, most of the party's establishment figures -- including Senator John McCain and popular New Jersey Governor Chris Christie -- have backed Romney.
Nevada holds its caucus vote on Saturday, along with a similar caucus in Maine, while five other US states will hold votes in the coming month.
As the first western state in the 2012 Republican nomination battle, Nevada thrusts new demographics and issues into the limelight, including concerns over illegal immigration, the environment and natural resources.
Like Florida, the Silver State has been badly hit by the recession, with soaring unemployment and a housing market devastated by the 2008 meltdown.
Romney, who won handily here in the 2008 White House race, can expect a boost from fellow Mormons. Four years ago, 26 percent of Nevada Republican caucus voters were Mormon and 95 percent of them backed Romney.
The two other Republicans still in the race -- Texas representative Ron Paul and Pennsylvania's former senator Rick Santorum -- gave up on Florida and had already been busy canvassing in Nevada before Romney and Gingrich arrived.
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/romney-stumbles-as-gingrich-eyes-trump-boost.aspx?pageID=238&nID=12847&NewsCatID=358
Romney stumbles as Gingrich eyes Trump boost
Agence France- Presse
Republican White House frontrunner Mitt Romney stumbled a day after his Florida triumph with a gaffe about poor Americans, while rival Newt Gingrich eyed a boost Thursday from Donald Trump.
Populist real estate tycoon and reality TV star Trump, who flirted with running for the presidency himself last year, was expected to throw his weight behind Gingrich at a "major announcement" in Las Vegas.
Both Republican frontrunner candidates headed from Florida to the western battleground state of Nevada a day after Romney soundly defeated Gingrich in the Sunshine State, retaking the lead in the White House nomination race.
But the multi-millionaire former Massachusetts governor triggered immediate criticism for a controversial comment about America's poorest citizens, which threatened to slow his momentum.
"I'm not concerned about the very poor. We have a safety net there. If it needs repair, I'll fix it," said Romney, a wealthy businessman who last week acknowledged earning $20 million in 2010.
"I'm not concerned about the very rich, they're doing just fine," the former venture capital boss told CNN. "I'm concerned about the very heart of America, the 90-95 percent of Americans who right now are struggling." The remarks came as the race for the right to take on Democratic President Barack Obama in November widened into more states, and were quickly seized upon by his opponents.
Gingrich, who lost to Romney by more than 14 percentage points in Florida, fired back at his rival.
"I am fed up with politicians in either party dividing Americans against each other. I am running to be president of all the American people and I am concerned about all of the American people," Gingrich said in Nevada.
Romney swiftly tried to explain his remarks, telling reporters traveling with him on his plane that they should consider everything he said, rather than just part of the sentence.
"Of course I'm concerned about all Americans... poor, wealthy, middle class, but the focus of my effort will be on middle income families who I think have been most hurt by the Obama economy," he said later.
At a campaign stop in Las Vegas on Wednesday evening Romney was back on track, drawing cheers with his usual stump speech and taking digs at Obama's policies, including his backing for "European-style" health care.
Romney also attacked the "naivety" of an announcement Wednesday by Defense Secretary Leon Panetta that the US plans to end its combat mission in Afghanistan in 2013, one year before most US troops are due to withdraw.
"Why in the world do you go to the people that you're fighting with, and tell them the day you're pulling out your troops? It makes absolutely no sense," he told hundreds of supporters in a suburban Vegas warehouse.
On Thursday all eyes will be on Trump, who scheduled an announcement for 12:30 pm (2030 GMT) -- which the New York Times and other media said would be an endorsement for Gingrich.
Public backing from Trump, host of the popular celebrity version of reality TV show "The Apprentice," could give the former House speaker a higher media profile and aid him in fundraising.
Gingrich has been endorsed by ex-candidate Herman Cain, and former Alaska governor Sarah Palin had urged Florida voters to back him in order to extend the contest, a sign of his support among the ultra-conservative Tea Party.
However, most of the party's establishment figures -- including Senator John McCain and popular New Jersey Governor Chris Christie -- have backed Romney.
Nevada holds its caucus vote on Saturday, along with a similar caucus in Maine, while five other US states will hold votes in the coming month.
As the first western state in the 2012 Republican nomination battle, Nevada thrusts new demographics and issues into the limelight, including concerns over illegal immigration, the environment and natural resources.
Like Florida, the Silver State has been badly hit by the recession, with soaring unemployment and a housing market devastated by the 2008 meltdown.
Romney, who won handily here in the 2008 White House race, can expect a boost from fellow Mormons. Four years ago, 26 percent of Nevada Republican caucus voters were Mormon and 95 percent of them backed Romney.
The two other Republicans still in the race -- Texas representative Ron Paul and Pennsylvania's former senator Rick Santorum -- gave up on Florida and had already been busy canvassing in Nevada before Romney and Gingrich arrived.
http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/romney-stumbles-as-gingrich-eyes-trump-boost.aspx?pageID=238&nID=12847&NewsCatID=358
Israel: Eclectic jewish vote
Haaretz
Eclectic cast of Jews added spice to Florida primary
Most Jewish voters in Wednesday's Republican primary focused on the economy, but there were many outliers.
By Natasha Mozgovaya
The American elections are so prolonged and expensive that a different system would probably free up money for a pony for each U.S. citizen (a pony for each citizen is one of the campaign promises of the oddest presidential candidate, Vermin Supreme, who actually received 833 votes in last month's New Hampshire primary ). But the Americans will never give up their elections, even if - or maybe because - they sometimes resemble a carnival.
"It's the whole political process," said Sue Gibbs, retired school teacher and Newt Gingrich supporter, adjusting the colorful new buttons on her hat, which is topped with a toy elephant, ahead of her candidate's rally in Tampa the day before Florida's Republican primary. "I am so lucky and so blessed to be involved. Had I retired in the north, it wouldn't happen. But they are all coming to Florida!"
She doesn't understand how government has become so profligate, when she, a retiree who "counts every penny," pays her credit cards bills in full and on time. She also wished for more civility in the elections.
After a South Carolina drama in which Gingrich upset the front-runner, Mitt Romney's decisive Florida win has restored the former Massachusetts governor's status as the almost inevitable candidate.
"That's what the media would like you to think," said Jeremiah Greenberg, father of five. "They push Romney because he is the closest thing to Obama."
On primary day, Greenberg stood across the road from a Tampa polling station with a big sign reading "Exercise your faith" - supporting former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum. When he learned I was from Israel, he switched to Hebrew. So how come he supports the most religiously conservative candidate in the race? Well, this scion of a rabbinic family is a Messianic Jew. "If the Lubavitch believe Rabbi Schneerson is the Messiah, I can believe Jesus is the savior," he proclaimed.
Greenberg knows Santorum is the underdog, but "he is the most principled candidate. I was disappointed he couldn't come to campaign here more, but after Iowa, I decided to support him, because Iowans did the homework for the rest of the nation, meeting with all the candidates for five weeks, and they chose him."
Greenberg's candidate didn't do well Tuesday night: 46.4 percent of Florida Republican voters chose Romney, 31.9 percent opted for Gingrich, 13.4 percent for Santorum and 7 percent for Ron Paul, who preferred to spend his time campaigning in later primary states (though at the University of South Florida, where the polling booth was located in the local Hillel offices, there were plenty of signs supporting him - and none for other candidates ).
Romney celebrated early, at the Tampa Convention center. He warned the Democrats that "a competitive primary does not divide us; it prepares us," and promised his presidency would "begin a new era of American prosperity," repeal Obama's health-care law, and "stand with our friends and speak out for those seeking freedom."
"I want you to remember when our White House reflected the best of who we are, not the worst of what Europe has become," he told the cheering audience. "That America is still out there."
From Florida, Romney went on to rallies in Minnesota and Nevada. One of those who followed him was Jim Wilson, a veteran driving a truck decorated with two large Romney signs. "I am spending my grandchildren's money so hopefully they'll have something left of this country," he said. "I started in August in Iowa, and intend to finish at the inaugural ball." Why? "Because Mitt Romney is the only one that can beat Obama. He has the experience, the integrity and the energy."
Democrats fight back
But the Democrats weren't lying low: Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL ), who heads the Democratic National Committee, was ready to tear into the winner on the stairs of the same Tampa convention center where Romney celebrated his victory.
"I've been spending some time chasing the Republican candidates around the country," she admitted to Haaretz. "Because I am not going to let them get away on my watch as DNC chairman with distorting and lying about the president, and I think voters need to know there is a dramatic contrast and a clear choice" between Obama and Romney.
I told her some Gingrich supporters say they reject Romney because to them, Romney is Obama. "I am not surprised," she shrugged. "The Republicans have no idea who or what Mitt Romney stands for, because he was willing to say anything to get elected. In Iowa he says he'll veto the DREAM act [a bill to legalize certain illegal immigrants], but in Florida he says he'll support some version of it."
So, I asked her, you are attacking Romney exclusively because a Gingrich victory would be better for Democrats?
"They are really interchangeable," she said. "They are trying to out-right-wing each other. They are all extreme."
The Republican candidates didn't focus much on Florida's Jews, since only a tiny fraction of them vote in the Republican primary: Jews constituted 3 percent of primary voters in 2008 and only 1 percent this year. Gingrich's campaign assailed Romney for "vetoing, as governor, a bill that would pay for kosher food for Jewish seniors in his state," via robocalls wrongfully claiming that Holocaust survivors "for the first time were forced to eat nonkosher because Romney thought $5 was too much to pay for our grandparents to eat kosher." Jewish seniors were not actually forced to eat nonkosher, but when campaigning, anything that harms your opponent is kosher.
Most Jewish voters we met were more worried about the economy. But some asked the candidates who bothered to show up about Israel and Iran, others about Jonathan Pollard.
At one Romney rally, I met an anomaly: Daniel Najman, an Orthodox Jew who says he supports Ron Paul - because of his support for Israel.
"He is considered to be anti-Israeli, anti-Jewish, but he wants to cut all foreign aid, including money to Israel," Najman said. "I've spoken many times to Israelis about the 'two-state final solution,' and they say it's dangerous, but they can't reject it because of America. If there is no aid, there can be, as Ron Paul says, equal relations. Israel can do what it wants. Besides, the Jewish state doesn't need any charity."
Wasserman Schultz said she is confident that the "overwhelming majority of Jews in Florida and over the country will support President Obama. As Jews, we care about domestic policy, health care, education; we stand for people who have no voice; and the Republicans don't agree with the Jewish community on any of those issues. And on Israel, the Israeli leadership has repeatedly said that President Obama has been Israel's greatest friend."
For Gingrich, Florida was bad news: Romney succeeded in establishing his credentials even among the state's conservatives. Romney also did well among women - perhaps in part because of his wife Ann's active role in his campaign events. She introduces him as her husband, father of her five sons and America's next president, and stresses his support for her role as a mother, which resonates with many American women. Romney is not ashamed to introduce her as "my sweetheart" and extend his hand for her when she gets off the bus.
In contrast, Callista Gingrich, the former speaker's wife and his advisor behind the scenes, usually stands silently near her husband at rallies, smiling, nodding, clapping hands and moving her lips, saying: "That's right, that's right."
There were plenty of Gingrich supporters in Florida. At one polling station, Cuban American retiree Francisco Rivera couldn't pronounce his name correctly, calling him "Girich." But for him, "Girich" was the right choice, because "Girich is straight, and Romney, I don't like him; he changes too much." Still, Tuesday wasn't a good day for him.
For Gingrich, who said "it's a two-man race" and promised to stay in it until the nomination in August, the big question is whether he can keep the donations flowing - and whether he can hold on to his base.
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/eclectic-cast-of-jews-added-spice-to-florida-primary-1.410507
Eclectic cast of Jews added spice to Florida primary
Most Jewish voters in Wednesday's Republican primary focused on the economy, but there were many outliers.
By Natasha Mozgovaya
The American elections are so prolonged and expensive that a different system would probably free up money for a pony for each U.S. citizen (a pony for each citizen is one of the campaign promises of the oddest presidential candidate, Vermin Supreme, who actually received 833 votes in last month's New Hampshire primary ). But the Americans will never give up their elections, even if - or maybe because - they sometimes resemble a carnival.
"It's the whole political process," said Sue Gibbs, retired school teacher and Newt Gingrich supporter, adjusting the colorful new buttons on her hat, which is topped with a toy elephant, ahead of her candidate's rally in Tampa the day before Florida's Republican primary. "I am so lucky and so blessed to be involved. Had I retired in the north, it wouldn't happen. But they are all coming to Florida!"
She doesn't understand how government has become so profligate, when she, a retiree who "counts every penny," pays her credit cards bills in full and on time. She also wished for more civility in the elections.
After a South Carolina drama in which Gingrich upset the front-runner, Mitt Romney's decisive Florida win has restored the former Massachusetts governor's status as the almost inevitable candidate.
"That's what the media would like you to think," said Jeremiah Greenberg, father of five. "They push Romney because he is the closest thing to Obama."
On primary day, Greenberg stood across the road from a Tampa polling station with a big sign reading "Exercise your faith" - supporting former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum. When he learned I was from Israel, he switched to Hebrew. So how come he supports the most religiously conservative candidate in the race? Well, this scion of a rabbinic family is a Messianic Jew. "If the Lubavitch believe Rabbi Schneerson is the Messiah, I can believe Jesus is the savior," he proclaimed.
Greenberg knows Santorum is the underdog, but "he is the most principled candidate. I was disappointed he couldn't come to campaign here more, but after Iowa, I decided to support him, because Iowans did the homework for the rest of the nation, meeting with all the candidates for five weeks, and they chose him."
Greenberg's candidate didn't do well Tuesday night: 46.4 percent of Florida Republican voters chose Romney, 31.9 percent opted for Gingrich, 13.4 percent for Santorum and 7 percent for Ron Paul, who preferred to spend his time campaigning in later primary states (though at the University of South Florida, where the polling booth was located in the local Hillel offices, there were plenty of signs supporting him - and none for other candidates ).
Romney celebrated early, at the Tampa Convention center. He warned the Democrats that "a competitive primary does not divide us; it prepares us," and promised his presidency would "begin a new era of American prosperity," repeal Obama's health-care law, and "stand with our friends and speak out for those seeking freedom."
"I want you to remember when our White House reflected the best of who we are, not the worst of what Europe has become," he told the cheering audience. "That America is still out there."
From Florida, Romney went on to rallies in Minnesota and Nevada. One of those who followed him was Jim Wilson, a veteran driving a truck decorated with two large Romney signs. "I am spending my grandchildren's money so hopefully they'll have something left of this country," he said. "I started in August in Iowa, and intend to finish at the inaugural ball." Why? "Because Mitt Romney is the only one that can beat Obama. He has the experience, the integrity and the energy."
Democrats fight back
But the Democrats weren't lying low: Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL ), who heads the Democratic National Committee, was ready to tear into the winner on the stairs of the same Tampa convention center where Romney celebrated his victory.
"I've been spending some time chasing the Republican candidates around the country," she admitted to Haaretz. "Because I am not going to let them get away on my watch as DNC chairman with distorting and lying about the president, and I think voters need to know there is a dramatic contrast and a clear choice" between Obama and Romney.
I told her some Gingrich supporters say they reject Romney because to them, Romney is Obama. "I am not surprised," she shrugged. "The Republicans have no idea who or what Mitt Romney stands for, because he was willing to say anything to get elected. In Iowa he says he'll veto the DREAM act [a bill to legalize certain illegal immigrants], but in Florida he says he'll support some version of it."
So, I asked her, you are attacking Romney exclusively because a Gingrich victory would be better for Democrats?
"They are really interchangeable," she said. "They are trying to out-right-wing each other. They are all extreme."
The Republican candidates didn't focus much on Florida's Jews, since only a tiny fraction of them vote in the Republican primary: Jews constituted 3 percent of primary voters in 2008 and only 1 percent this year. Gingrich's campaign assailed Romney for "vetoing, as governor, a bill that would pay for kosher food for Jewish seniors in his state," via robocalls wrongfully claiming that Holocaust survivors "for the first time were forced to eat nonkosher because Romney thought $5 was too much to pay for our grandparents to eat kosher." Jewish seniors were not actually forced to eat nonkosher, but when campaigning, anything that harms your opponent is kosher.
Most Jewish voters we met were more worried about the economy. But some asked the candidates who bothered to show up about Israel and Iran, others about Jonathan Pollard.
At one Romney rally, I met an anomaly: Daniel Najman, an Orthodox Jew who says he supports Ron Paul - because of his support for Israel.
"He is considered to be anti-Israeli, anti-Jewish, but he wants to cut all foreign aid, including money to Israel," Najman said. "I've spoken many times to Israelis about the 'two-state final solution,' and they say it's dangerous, but they can't reject it because of America. If there is no aid, there can be, as Ron Paul says, equal relations. Israel can do what it wants. Besides, the Jewish state doesn't need any charity."
Wasserman Schultz said she is confident that the "overwhelming majority of Jews in Florida and over the country will support President Obama. As Jews, we care about domestic policy, health care, education; we stand for people who have no voice; and the Republicans don't agree with the Jewish community on any of those issues. And on Israel, the Israeli leadership has repeatedly said that President Obama has been Israel's greatest friend."
For Gingrich, Florida was bad news: Romney succeeded in establishing his credentials even among the state's conservatives. Romney also did well among women - perhaps in part because of his wife Ann's active role in his campaign events. She introduces him as her husband, father of her five sons and America's next president, and stresses his support for her role as a mother, which resonates with many American women. Romney is not ashamed to introduce her as "my sweetheart" and extend his hand for her when she gets off the bus.
In contrast, Callista Gingrich, the former speaker's wife and his advisor behind the scenes, usually stands silently near her husband at rallies, smiling, nodding, clapping hands and moving her lips, saying: "That's right, that's right."
There were plenty of Gingrich supporters in Florida. At one polling station, Cuban American retiree Francisco Rivera couldn't pronounce his name correctly, calling him "Girich." But for him, "Girich" was the right choice, because "Girich is straight, and Romney, I don't like him; he changes too much." Still, Tuesday wasn't a good day for him.
For Gingrich, who said "it's a two-man race" and promised to stay in it until the nomination in August, the big question is whether he can keep the donations flowing - and whether he can hold on to his base.
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/eclectic-cast-of-jews-added-spice-to-florida-primary-1.410507
UK: "I'm not concerned about the very poor..."
PJ: It took a while to get around the world but Romney's unfortunate choice of wording has finally made it.
The Guardian
Mitt Romney: 'I'm not concerned about the very poor' - video
In an attempt to explain his focus on Middle America, Republican presidential frontrunner Mitt Romney says in an interview on CNN on Wednesday: 'I'm not concerned about the very poor.' His comment provoked instant criticism from Republican opponents and Democrats alike
Video
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2012/feb/02/mitt-romney-not-concerned-very-poor-video
The Guardian
Mitt Romney: 'I'm not concerned about the very poor' - video
In an attempt to explain his focus on Middle America, Republican presidential frontrunner Mitt Romney says in an interview on CNN on Wednesday: 'I'm not concerned about the very poor.' His comment provoked instant criticism from Republican opponents and Democrats alike
Video
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/video/2012/feb/02/mitt-romney-not-concerned-very-poor-video
“The Post-American World,”
PJ: Mr. Zakaria is one of those unique individuals who can look at his adopted country with an outsider's eyes. His piece is excellent.
The Washington Post
The world has changed, Mr. Romney
By Fareed Zakaria
Opinion Writer
Dear Mitt Romney,
Congratulations on Florida. Now that you are again the front-runner, and your campaign focus is returning to President Obama, I’d like to call attention to a line you have used repeatedly: “This is a president who fundamentally believes that this next century is the post-American century.” I leave it to the president to describe what he believes, but as the author of the book “The Post-American World,” let me make sure you know what exactly you are attacking.
“This is a book not about the decline of America but rather about the rise of everyone else,” I note at the very outset. I am optimistic about America, convinced that it can prosper in this new world and remain the most powerful country on the planet. But I argue that the age of American unipolarity — which began with the collapse of the Soviet Union — has ended. For a quarter-century after the collapse of communism, the United States dominated the world with no real political or economic competitors. Its ideas and its model — the Washington consensus — became received wisdom everywhere.
Today we are in a different era. In 1990, China represented 2 percent of global gross domestic product. It has quadrupled, to 8 percent, and is rising. By most estimates, China’s economy will become the world’s largest between 2016 and 2018.
This is not simply an economic story. China’s military capacity and reach are expanding. Since 2008 Chinese naval fleets have escorted more than 4,300 ships through the Gulf of Aden. Beijing’s defense spending is likely to surpass America’s by 2025. For its foreign policy activism, look on any continent: A gleaming new African Union headquarters was unveiled in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, last week. The $200 million-plus complex was financed by China and inaugurated by a high-ranking Politburo member, who arrived with a check for $94 million.
It is not just China that is rising. Emerging powers on every continent have achieved political stability and economic growth and are becoming active on the global stage. Twenty years ago Turkey was a fragile democracy, dominated by its army, that had a weak economy constantly in need of Western bailouts. Today, Turkey has a trillion-dollar economy that grew 6.6 percent last year. Since April 2009, Turkey has created 3.4 million jobs — more than the European Union, Russia and South Africa put together. That might explain Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s confidence and his country’s energetic foreign policy.
Look in this hemisphere: In 1990, Brazil was emerging from decades of dictatorship and was wracked by inflation rates that reached 3,000 percent. Its president was impeached in 1992. Today, the country is a stable democracy, steadily growing with foreign-exchange reserves of $350 billion. Its foreign policy has become extremely active. President Dilma Rousseff is in Cuba this week, “marking Brazil’s highest-profile bid to transform its growing economic might into diplomatic leadership in Latin America,” the Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday. Brazil’s state development bank is financing a $680 million rehabilitation of Cuba’s port at Mariel.
For three decades, India was unable to get any Western country to accept its status as a nuclear power. But as its economy boomed and Asia became the new cockpit of global affairs, the mood shifted. Over the past five years the United States, France, Britain and others have made a massive exception for New Delhi’s nuclear program and have assiduously courted India as a new ally. I could go on.
This is a new world, very different from the America-centric one we got used to over the last generation. Obama has succeeded in preserving and even enhancing U.S. influence in this world precisely because he has recognized these new forces at work. He has traveled to the emerging nations and spoken admiringly of their rise. He replaced the old Western club and made the Group of 20 the central decision-making forum for global economic affairs. By emphasizing multilateral organizations, alliance structures and international legitimacy, he got results. It was Chinese and Russian cooperation that produced tougher sanctions against Iran. It was the Arab League’s formal request last year that made Western intervention in Libya uncontroversial.
By and large, you have ridiculed this approach to foreign policy, arguing that you would instead expand the military, act unilaterally and talk unapologetically. That might appeal to Republican primary voters, but chest-thumping triumphalism won’t help you secure America’s interests or ideals in a world populated by powerful new players.
You can call this new century whatever you like, but it won’t change reality. After all, just because we call it the World Series doesn’t make it one.
comments@fareedzakaria.com
The Washington Post
The world has changed, Mr. Romney
By Fareed Zakaria
Opinion Writer
Dear Mitt Romney,
Congratulations on Florida. Now that you are again the front-runner, and your campaign focus is returning to President Obama, I’d like to call attention to a line you have used repeatedly: “This is a president who fundamentally believes that this next century is the post-American century.” I leave it to the president to describe what he believes, but as the author of the book “The Post-American World,” let me make sure you know what exactly you are attacking.
“This is a book not about the decline of America but rather about the rise of everyone else,” I note at the very outset. I am optimistic about America, convinced that it can prosper in this new world and remain the most powerful country on the planet. But I argue that the age of American unipolarity — which began with the collapse of the Soviet Union — has ended. For a quarter-century after the collapse of communism, the United States dominated the world with no real political or economic competitors. Its ideas and its model — the Washington consensus — became received wisdom everywhere.
Today we are in a different era. In 1990, China represented 2 percent of global gross domestic product. It has quadrupled, to 8 percent, and is rising. By most estimates, China’s economy will become the world’s largest between 2016 and 2018.
This is not simply an economic story. China’s military capacity and reach are expanding. Since 2008 Chinese naval fleets have escorted more than 4,300 ships through the Gulf of Aden. Beijing’s defense spending is likely to surpass America’s by 2025. For its foreign policy activism, look on any continent: A gleaming new African Union headquarters was unveiled in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, last week. The $200 million-plus complex was financed by China and inaugurated by a high-ranking Politburo member, who arrived with a check for $94 million.
It is not just China that is rising. Emerging powers on every continent have achieved political stability and economic growth and are becoming active on the global stage. Twenty years ago Turkey was a fragile democracy, dominated by its army, that had a weak economy constantly in need of Western bailouts. Today, Turkey has a trillion-dollar economy that grew 6.6 percent last year. Since April 2009, Turkey has created 3.4 million jobs — more than the European Union, Russia and South Africa put together. That might explain Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s confidence and his country’s energetic foreign policy.
Look in this hemisphere: In 1990, Brazil was emerging from decades of dictatorship and was wracked by inflation rates that reached 3,000 percent. Its president was impeached in 1992. Today, the country is a stable democracy, steadily growing with foreign-exchange reserves of $350 billion. Its foreign policy has become extremely active. President Dilma Rousseff is in Cuba this week, “marking Brazil’s highest-profile bid to transform its growing economic might into diplomatic leadership in Latin America,” the Wall Street Journal reported Wednesday. Brazil’s state development bank is financing a $680 million rehabilitation of Cuba’s port at Mariel.
For three decades, India was unable to get any Western country to accept its status as a nuclear power. But as its economy boomed and Asia became the new cockpit of global affairs, the mood shifted. Over the past five years the United States, France, Britain and others have made a massive exception for New Delhi’s nuclear program and have assiduously courted India as a new ally. I could go on.
This is a new world, very different from the America-centric one we got used to over the last generation. Obama has succeeded in preserving and even enhancing U.S. influence in this world precisely because he has recognized these new forces at work. He has traveled to the emerging nations and spoken admiringly of their rise. He replaced the old Western club and made the Group of 20 the central decision-making forum for global economic affairs. By emphasizing multilateral organizations, alliance structures and international legitimacy, he got results. It was Chinese and Russian cooperation that produced tougher sanctions against Iran. It was the Arab League’s formal request last year that made Western intervention in Libya uncontroversial.
By and large, you have ridiculed this approach to foreign policy, arguing that you would instead expand the military, act unilaterally and talk unapologetically. That might appeal to Republican primary voters, but chest-thumping triumphalism won’t help you secure America’s interests or ideals in a world populated by powerful new players.
You can call this new century whatever you like, but it won’t change reality. After all, just because we call it the World Series doesn’t make it one.
comments@fareedzakaria.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)