Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
segunda-feira, 25 de janeiro de 2010
domingo, 24 de janeiro de 2010
sábado, 23 de janeiro de 2010
quarta-feira, 20 de janeiro de 2010
Obama é Presidente há um ano (VII): um discurso poderoso e realista
«My fellow citizens: I stand here today humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust you've bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors.
I thank President Bush for his service to our nation -- (applause) -- as well as the generosity and cooperation he has shown throughout this transition.
Forty-four Americans have now taken the presidential oath. The words have been spoken during rising tides of prosperity and the still waters of peace. Yet, every so often, the oath is taken amidst gathering clouds and raging storms. At these moments, America has carried on not simply because of the skill or vision of those in high office, but because we, the people, have remained faithful to the ideals of our forebears and true to our founding documents.
So it has been; so it must be with this generation of Americans.
That we are in the midst of crisis is now well understood. Our nation is at war against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred. Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age. Homes have been lost, jobs shed, businesses shuttered. Our health care is too costly, our schools fail too many -- and each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet.
These are the indicators of crisis, subject to data and statistics. Less measurable, but no less profound, is a sapping of confidence across our land; a nagging fear that America's decline is inevitable, that the next generation must lower its sights.
Today I say to you that the challenges we face are real. They are serious and they are many. They will not be met easily or in a short span of time. But know this America: They will be met. (Applause.)
On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord. On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn-out dogmas that for far too long have strangled our politics. We remain a young nation. But in the words of Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things. The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness. (Applause.)
In reaffirming the greatness of our nation we understand that greatness is never a given. It must be earned. Our journey has never been one of short-cuts or settling for less. It has not been the path for the faint-hearted, for those that prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches and fame. Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things -- some celebrated, but more often men and women obscure in their labor -- who have carried us up the long rugged path towards prosperity and freedom.
For us, they packed up their few worldly possessions and traveled across oceans in search of a new life. For us, they toiled in sweatshops, and settled the West, endured the lash of the whip, and plowed the hard earth. For us, they fought and died in places like Concord and Gettysburg, Normandy and Khe Sahn.
Time and again these men and women struggled and sacrificed and worked till their hands were raw so that we might live a better life. They saw America as bigger than the sum of our individual ambitions, greater than all the differences of birth or wealth or faction.
This is the journey we continue today. We remain the most prosperous, powerful nation on Earth. Our workers are no less productive than when this crisis began. Our minds are no less inventive, our goods and services no less needed than they were last week, or last month, or last year. Our capacity remains undiminished. But our time of standing pat, of protecting narrow interests and putting off unpleasant decisions -- that time has surely passed. Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America. (Applause.)
For everywhere we look, there is work to be done. The state of our economy calls for action, bold and swift. And we will act, not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth. We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. We'll restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology's wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. All this we will do.
Now, there are some who question the scale of our ambitions, who suggest that our system cannot tolerate too many big plans. Their memories are short, for they have forgotten what this country has already done, what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common purpose, and necessity to courage. What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them, that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply.
The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works -- whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. And those of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account, to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day, because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.
Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched. But this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control. The nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous. The success of our economy has always depended not just on the size of our gross domestic product, but on the reach of our prosperity, on the ability to extend opportunity to every willing heart -- not out of charity, but because it is the surest route to our common good. (Applause.)
As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our Founding Fathers -- (applause) -- our Founding Fathers, faced with perils that we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man -- a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience sake. (Applause.)
And so, to all the other peoples and governments who are watching today, from the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born, know that America is a friend of each nation, and every man, woman and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity. And we are ready to lead once more. (Applause.)
Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with the sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.
We are the keepers of this legacy. Guided by these principles once more we can meet those new threats that demand even greater effort, even greater cooperation and understanding between nations. We will begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people and forge a hard-earned peace in Afghanistan. With old friends and former foes, we'll work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat, and roll back the specter of a warming planet.
We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense. And for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken -- you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you. (Applause.)
For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus, and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.
To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West, know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. (Applause.)
To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history, but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist. (Applause.)
To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish and let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies and feed hungry minds. And to those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to the suffering outside our borders, nor can we consume the world's resources without regard to effect. For the world has changed, and we must change with it.
As we consider the role that unfolds before us, we remember with humble gratitude those brave Americans who at this very hour patrol far-off deserts and distant mountains. They have something to tell us, just as the fallen heroes who lie in Arlington whisper through the ages.
We honor them not only because they are the guardians of our liberty, but because they embody the spirit of service -- a willingness to find meaning in something greater than themselves.
And yet at this moment, a moment that will define a generation, it is precisely this spirit that must inhabit us all. For as much as government can do, and must do, it is ultimately the faith and determination of the American people upon which this nation relies. It is the kindness to take in a stranger when the levees break, the selflessness of workers who would rather cut their hours than see a friend lose their job which sees us through our darkest hours. It is the firefighter's courage to storm a stairway filled with smoke, but also a parent's willingness to nurture a child that finally decides our fate.
Our challenges may be new. The instruments with which we meet them may be new. But those values upon which our success depends -- honesty and hard work, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism -- these things are old. These things are true. They have been the quiet force of progress throughout our history.
What is demanded, then, is a return to these truths. What is required of us now is a new era of responsibility -- a recognition on the part of every American that we have duties to ourselves, our nation and the world; duties that we do not grudgingly accept, but rather seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of our character than giving our all to a difficult task.
This is the price and the promise of citizenship. This is the source of our confidence -- the knowledge that God calls on us to shape an uncertain destiny. This is the meaning of our liberty and our creed, why men and women and children of every race and every faith can join in celebration across this magnificent mall; and why a man whose father less than 60 years ago might not have been served in a local restaurant can now stand before you to take a most sacred oath. (Applause.)
So let us mark this day with remembrance of who we are and how far we have traveled. In the year of America's birth, in the coldest of months, a small band of patriots huddled by dying campfires on the shores of an icy river. The capital was abandoned. The enemy was advancing. The snow was stained with blood. At the moment when the outcome of our revolution was most in doubt, the father of our nation ordered these words to be read to the people:
"Let it be told to the future world...that in the depth of winter, when nothing but hope and virtue could survive... that the city and the country, alarmed at one common danger, came forth to meet [it]."
America: In the face of our common dangers, in this winter of our hardship, let us remember these timeless words. With hope and virtue, let us brave once more the icy currents, and endure what storms may come. Let it be said by our children's children that when we were tested we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back nor did we falter; and with eyes fixed on the horizon and God's grace upon us, we carried forth that great gift of freedom and delivered it safely to future generations.
Thank you. God bless you. And God bless the United States of America.»
terça-feira, 19 de janeiro de 2010
domingo, 17 de janeiro de 2010
Senado 2010: Scott Brown 48-Martha Coakley 45
O candidato republicano está ligeiramente à frente da pretendente democrata, actual procoradora-geral do Massachussets, na disputa pelo lugar deixado vago pela morte de Ted Kennedy.
(sondagem American Research Group, dados recolhidos entre 12 e 14 de Janeiro)
sábado, 16 de janeiro de 2010
Depois de «Game Change», há mais três livros sobre a campanha de 2008 a caminho...
Um é de Bob Woodward, outro de Jonathan Alter e haverá ainda um terceiro de Ryan Lizza.
Um artigo de Michael Calderone, no POLITICO.COM:
«“Game Change” by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin has touched off a debate about anonymous sourcing and the accuracy of narrative-driven political books. But the debate isn’t likely to end soon because Bob Woodward and at least two other prominent political journalists, Jonathan Alter and Ryan Lizza, have similar books about the Obama administration coming out this year.
Woodward, the capital’s foremost fly-on-the-wall chronicler of political power, is unapologetic about using anonymous sourcing to enable high-level participants to give accounts of contemporary events. “It’s the only method if you’re going to get an unlaundered version of what occurred,” he said.
But Woodward balks at the idea that he was simply “recreating” scenes in his books. “It’s reported,” he said. “So-and-so was there and they said this. There are meeting notes and so forth.”
His new book, which he said is “going very well,” will use the same methods, and a White House official confirmed that Woodward is getting access to senior officials and will likely sit down with the president.
Alter, a Newsweek senior editor who will be first out of the gate with his Obama White House book in May - “The Promise: President Obama, Year One” - said “the idea that you can write one of these books without using anonymous sources is erroneous.”
“Long-form journalism or works of history benefit from narrative drive,” Alter said. “Most of my scenes are quite short, but it is necessary to include some dialogue in order to take the reader as close as possible to what happened. In my reporting experience, people tend to remember quite well what the president said. I often rely on their memories if the quotations are short.”
Background sourcing can be essential, Alter said, because “you don’t want the source to be parsing every word. You want them to tell you what happened.”
Granting sources anonymity is a bargain made daily in Washington journalism, with the upside being proximity to the unvarnished truth. The downside: getting spun by sources for their own purpose while under the cloak of anonymity.
“Game Change,” which has already been optioned by HBO, has a cinematic feel, complete with such controversy-courting details as a phone conversation between Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy in which Kennedy later “fumed that Clinton had said, A few years ago, this guy would have been getting us coffee.”
What Clinton allegedly said isn’t in quotation marks—a practice that, according to the author’s note, “reflect[s] only a lack of certainty on the part of our sources about precise wording, not about the nature of the statements.” Although it may not be precise wording, several news organizations have run it as a verbatim quote from the 42nd president to the late lion of the Senate.
Plum Line blogger Greg Sargent questioned the methodology, writing that “in cases like these, when people are hinting at racism, the precise wording is everything. And in this case, the whole claim is based on an anonymous source’s recollection that someone who has now passed away told him or her that Clinton said something like this.”
For Sargent, “this really illustrates the perils of this approach to sourcing, particularly in the current media environment.”
That kind of sourcing can make it hard to evaluate the book’s content. Although Sen. Harry Reid readily acknowledged his by now-notorious remarks about Barack Obama’s skin color, it’s still not clear what the circumstances were when he made the remark. MSNBC’s Chris Matthews spent a couple minutes on the air Tuesday asking (and asking and asking) both Halperin and Heilemann if he was talking in an interview with them. "We're not talking about who we interviewed for the book,” Halperin responded.
Still, other journalists agree with Woodward and Alter that in order to write a compelling narrative that takes the reader behind-the-scenes—often as events are still unfolding— there is often no alternative.
New York Times White House reporter Peter Baker, whose 2000 book “The Breach” used background sources to bring readers inside the Clinton impeachment and trial, said that as the author, you have “to decide is if you can write a more honest book if you give sources that sort of protection”
“In hindsight, I wish I had been able to do that book with footnotes and more transparent attribution,” Baker said, adding that it can be a “greater work of history” that way.
But when covering real-time events with subjects still in office, as Baker did in “The Breach,” it would have been far more difficult—if not impossible—to tell the story through on-the-record interviews only.
Baker said that he may try and conduct more on-the-record interviews and include footnoting for a book he’s planning to write for Doubleday on the Bush administration, given that the participants are no longer in office. But that will depend on what he gets from sources.
“If that’s not producing the kind of material that’s generally interesting or revelatory, or not catching the back-story, I’d rethink it,” Baker said.
“The unavoidable reality is that people who are uniquely qualified to reveal near-real-time events—particularly for a book that's published close to when the events occurred—aren’t likely to do so unless their identities are concealed,” said Robert Draper, who interviewed Bush and top staffers for his book “Dead Certain.”
“Like hollering at the rain, nothing's going to change that elemental truth in this town,” Draper continued. “That said, reconstructing a hitherto-secret narrative by means of anonymous sourcing is asking a lot of readers.”
Draper added that the “more insidious threat to journalistic credibility isn't anonymous sourcing but rather the tendency, on the part of some authors and reporters, to reward access with hagiography.”
Insiders typically read the narrative genre of political books on another level, parsing blind quotes for evidence of who blabbed and who didn’t. “It’s kind of a famous pastime,” said Dan Bartlett, who served as a high-level White House aide to former President George W. Bush. “People leave interesting tracks.”
Bartlett also has the unique perspective of someone who tried to manage a Woodward book. For “Bush at War”—the first of four books Woodward wrote on the administration— Bartlett said that Woodward was given “reams of material” and granted “countless” interviews with senior-level staffers and Bush. For his third Bush book, “State of Denial,” the White House decided not to give Woodward as much access or an interview with the president.
In Bartlett’s view, the tone and tenor of that book were more negative, reflecting the fact that often by providing key officials “you can undermine a potentially negative narrative.”
If narratives of contemporary events are influenced by who talks anonymously and who doesn’t, along with the level of access, will they play a significant role in the historical record?
Sean Wilentz, a Princeton historian who has written about Ronald Reagan as well as Andrew Jackson, said that “Game Change” or similarly-sourced books have “tended not to have an impact on historical assessment [but are] good for the moment.”
Rick Perlstein, author of “Nixonland” and a biography of Barry Goldwater, has a harsher view of the lack of transparency from Halperin and Heilemann. “Why should we grant them more cultural authority than we do the National Enquirer?” Perlstein said.
“These guys don’t care to defend themselves on the basic questions of verifiability,” Perlstein added. “If they’re comfortable with that, more power to them. We have to decide as readers and commentators whether we’re comfortable than that.”
But Halperin and Heilemann aren’t the first authors of such books to attract criticism over what can and cannot be verified. Whenever a Woodward book drops, someone involved always seems to question the accuracy of specific scenes. But often Woodward is vindicated.
After the publication of “Final Days,” Henry A. Kissinger said Woodward had gotten it wrong when he described him praying with Nixon the day before the president’s resignation. Years later, Kissinger wrote his own account of the prayer session.
And while some Clinton insiders blasted “The Agenda” in 1994, George Stephanopoulos, a White House aide when Woodward was writing his book described it in his memoir as “a comprehensive and basically accurate account.”
Political figures from Senator Charles Schumer to Sarah Palin have questioned the accuracy of “Game Change,” with the debate spilling out onto cable news. Even Woodward got into the act this week on MSNBC, raising questions about an anecdote early in the book in which the authors write that after watching Hillary Clinton’s reaction to losing the Iowa caucus, one of her “senior-most lieutenants thought for the first time, This woman shouldn’t be president.”
“The question is: who is it?” asked Woodward. And second, he continued, “does it reflect a fundamental attitude? Does this person really think this person shouldn't be president?"»
sexta-feira, 15 de janeiro de 2010
Subscrever:
Mensagens (Atom)