Os recados de Hillary ao Paquistão

Joe Lieberman admite juntar-se a um «filibuster» republicano na Reforma da Saúde

... se a «public option» se mantiver na proposta do 'ObamaCare'. Lieberman, nomeado do Partido Democrata para vice-presidente no ticket de Al Gore, em 2000, tem-se aproximado dos republicanos em temas de segurança nacional e, agora, também na Reforma da Saúde.

Joe Biden perde popularidade

Hillary Clinton muito dura sobre os atentados no Paquistão: «Cobardes»

«Islamabad, Pakistan (CNN) -- Just a few hours after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrived in Islamabad, a massive car bomb exploded in a crowded market frequented by women in the northwest city of Peshawar, a two-hour drive away.

The city lies near Pakistan's tribal areas where al Qaeda and other extremist groups are believed to be hiding.

Condemning what she called "vicious attacks," Clinton called those who carry them out "cowards."

"They are not courageous, they are cowardly," she told reporters, speaking slowly and deliberately. "If the people behind these attacks were so sure of their beliefs, let them join the political process. Let them come forth to the people of Pakistan in this democracy and make their case that they don't want girls to go to school. That they want women to be kept back."

At her side, Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi, his voice rising in anger, spoke directly to Pakistan's extremists: "We will not buckle. We will fight you. We will fight you because we want stability and peace in Pakistan," he said. "You are on the run, and we know that."

Pakistan's military, he said, "defeated" extremists in military operations in the Swat Valley this spring and, he said, "brave soldiers and officers of the Pakistan army will defeat you in Waziristan. You think by attacking innocent people and lives, you will shake our determination? No, sir, you will not! We will be more determined to fight you and defeat you for our own reasons; because we have a vision of Pakistan, and that vision does not fall in line with what you stand for."

It was not what Clinton was planning for her first day in Pakistan.

En route to Islamabad, Clinton, wearing glasses and dressed informally, talked with reporters on her plane. There have been "a lot of a misconceptions about what the United States intends with our relationship with Pakistan," she said.

"And I want to make clear that the United States and Pakistan have a long history of cooperation and partnership. We have a relationship that we want to strengthen, but we don't want it to be lopsided. We don't want it to be just about security and just about our anti-terrorist agenda, although, as I said, that's our highest priority. So we want to strengthen democracy, we want to strengthen civilian institutions, which we think are in the best interest of the people of Pakistan."

It's unfortunate, she said, that there are those who question U.S. motives, "skeptical that we're going to commit to a long-term relationship, and I want to try to clear the air on that," she said.

But it's a tough sell, especially on a day in which scores died in a car bombing.

But, to underscore the U.S. commitment to Pakistanis, the secretary announced the U.S. is providing $125 million for the first phase of a Signature Energy Program in Pakistan aimed at increasing electricity output and conserving wasted energy and money.

The message is out, and there is more to come. Clinton has launched a media blitz in Pakistan, trying to put back on track this relationship which, she says, still has a lot of "scar tissue."»

in CNNpolitics.com

'Fox not really News' - a guerra entre a polémica estação televisiva e a Administração Obama

Deve um Presidente assumir uma oposição tão frontal a um canal... mesmo que se trate da FOX??

A semana política em retrospectiva

Obama no MIT: uma forte aposta numa nova política energética

Roberta McCain, mãe de John McCain, 97 anos, foi hospitalizada em Lisboa

Roberta McCain estava em Lisboa, como turista, despercebida. Caiu dentro de um café da Baixa e foi internada no Hospital de São José. Deverá voltar aos Estados Unidos no fim-de-semana. Uma história improvável, que mostra a enorme robustez desta quase centenária. Um 'scoop' da TVI24.

«(CNN) – The mother of U.S. Senator and former presidential candidate John McCain is hospitalized in Lisbon, Portugal, after injuring her head in a fall, McCain's spokeswoman said Friday.

Roberta McCain, 97, was visiting Lisbon as a tourist when she fainted and hurt her head, spokeswoman Brooke Buchanan said.

McCain is stable and will be held for observation, Dr. Fatima Palmero of the Sao Jose Hospital told CNN. It is not clear when McCain might leave the hospital, Palermo said.

The senator has spoken to his mother and the doctors treating her, who report that she is recovering well, Buchanan said.

Portuguese TV station TVI24 reported that the elder McCain was taken to the hospital Tuesday afternoon after falling in a street in downtown Lisbon. She was found lying on the ground and had hurt her head and face, the station reported.

– CNN's Dana Bash in Washington and Andreia De Oliveira in London, England, contributed to this report.»

in CNNpolitics.com, citando o 'furo' da TVI24

Reforma da Saúde: 49% a favor, 49% contra

A opinião pública americana está dividida ao meio nesta questão crucial para o primeiro mandato de Obama, de acordo com uma sondagem CNN/Opinion Research Corporation

Sarah Palin vai ao programa de Oprah antes de lançar a sua autobiografia

A ex-governadora do Alaska, Sarah Palin, possível pretendente à nomeação republicana em 2012, vai lançar a sua autobiografia com o título 'Going Rogue: An American Life'.

Antes do lançamento, Palin vai falar sobre alguns dos excertos no programa de Oprah Winfrey.

«WASHINGTON (CNN) – Sarah Palin will sit down with Oprah Winfrey the day before her new memoir hits bookstores, Harpo announced Tuesday.

The former Alaska governor will make the appearance on Oprah on November 16 to talk about her highly anticipated tell-all, "Going Rogue: An American Life."

Palin has never before appeared on the popular daytime talk show. Last December, Winfrey said she had invited her on the show to discuss the election, but suggested at the time that Palin had instead chose other interviewers.

"I said I would be happy to talk to Sarah Palin when the election was over... I went and tried to talk to Sarah Palin and instead she talked to Greta [Van Susteren]. She talked to Matt [Lauer]. She talked to Larry [King]. But she didn't talk to me," Oprah told the show Extra last year.»

in CNNpolitics.com

Barómetro: 57 por cento de aprovação

Barack Obama vai recuperando a sua Taxa de Popularidade, depois de semanas de queda, por força dos problemas em aprovar a Reforma de Saúde e pelo agravamento da situação no Afeganistão.

SONDAGEM ABC/WASHINGTON POST
-- Aprovação: 57%
-- Reprovação: 40%

(dados recolhidos a 18 de Outubro)

Os livros preferidos de Obama

O Presidente conta aos miúdos da Viers Mill Elementary School algumas das suas experiências de leitura.

Opções para o Afeganistão: as visões de Rahm Emanuel e John Kerry

A semana política em retrospectiva

Obama defende Bobby Jindal, governador republicano da Luisiana e seu possível adversário presidencial em 2012, dos assobios da multidão

Olympia Snowe, a republicana que votou a favor da 'Baucus Bill', explica: «Quando a História chama, a História chama»

Obama felicita a passagem da 'Baucus Bill' no Comité de Finanças do Senado

... mas avisa que a Reforma da Saúde tem, ainda, muitos obstáculos a vencer.

Senado aprova, por 14-9, a Baucus Bill, um dos pontos da Reforma da Saúde

A senadora Olympia Snowe, do Maine, foi o único elemento do Partido Republicano no Congresso a votar 'sim' à Baucus Bill, proposta assinada por Max Baucus, líder do Comité de Finanças, integrada na Reforma da Saúde defendida pela Administração Obama.

A proposta passou no Senado por 14-9 e é mais um passo rumo à reestruturação do Sistema de Saúde na América.

A senadora Snowe já havia aprovado o 'stimulus package', quando da tempestade económica, mostrando ser um dos poucos membros republicanos do Senado capazes de fazer «pontes bipartidárias» durante a era Obama.

O Presidente já felicitou a senadora Olympia Snowe por ter dito 'sim' a uma das etapas de uma reforma que parecia ser impossível de se tornar consensual.

Uma reflexão de Rachel Maddow na ressaca do Nobel

Mais um teste à 'mudança': 'gays' pressionam Obama a anular o 'don't ask, don't tell' dos militares

Mensagem semanal: Obama fala num «novo fôlego» para a Reforma da Saúde

Afeganistão: John McCain apela ao envio de mais tropas para o terreno

Obama é Nobel da Paz (X): Al Gore, vencedor há dois anos, está «muito orgulhoso»

Obama é Nobel da Paz (IX): reacções à esquerda e à direita

Obama é Nobel da Paz (VIII): mais reacções dos 'pundits'

Obama é Nobel da Paz (VI): o novo lugar da América

Texto que publiquei, esta tarde, no site de A BOLA/Outros Mundos, integrado na rubrica «Histórias da Casa Branca»:

http://www.abola.pt/mundos/ver.aspx?id=178876

«Histórias da Casa Branca
O novo lugar da América

Por Germano Almeida

O Prémio Nobel da Paz hoje atribuído ao Presidente dos Estados Unidos foi uma enorme prova de que Barack Obama está mesmo a recuperar a face da «boa América», depois de oito anos de degradação do prestígio dos EUA, no consulado de George W. Bush.

Obama tornou-se o terceiro Presidente da história americana a ganhar o Nobel da Paz em pleno exercício de funções – só Theodore Roosevelt e Woodrow Wilson haviam conseguido tal feito.

Muitos consideram esta atribuição precoce (afinal de contas, Barack nem sequer completou um ano de mandato). Mas a dimensão da mudança já concretizada por Obama, na forma como a América se relaciona com o resto do Mundo, levou o Comité Nobel a tomar uma decisão arrojada, mas estimulante.

Na última década, sobretudo depois do 11 de Setembro e da desastrosa aventura no Iraque, passou a ser moda falar-se no «declínio da América». O agravar do défice e a eclosão da maior crise financeira das últimas sete décadas (com epicentro em grandes empresas e nos mercados bolsistas dos EUA) parecia dar razão à ideia do «fim do Império americano».

A queda do Muro de Berlim e o desmoronamento da URSS deixaram os Estados Unidos numa posição hegemónica na cena internacional. No início dos anos 90, a América parecia destinada a ficar como única superpotência de um mundo unipolar.

Houve quem profetizasse o «fim da História» (Fukuyama) e os anos dourados do Clintonismo em matéria económica – com dois mandatos de crescimento ininterrupto e desemprego baixo – reforçavam a tese de uma América pujante e em condições de assumir o papel de «farol».

A viragem do século deitou por terra este sonho lindo – e um pouco ingénuo, diga-se. O triste episódio da eleição de George W. Bush decretada pelo Supremo, apesar das suspeitas de que Al Gore terá tido mais votos na Florida, serviu como metáfora (quase trágica) da turbulência que estava para vir.

Os primeiros anos do século XXI foram muito duros para os Estados Unidos: com o 11 de Setembro, os americanos perderam a inocência e perceberam que, afinal, também eles podiam ser vulneráveis dentro do seu próprio território.

O agravamento da situação económica e a progressiva degradação do prestígio internacional dos EUA (Iraque, Abu Ghraib, Guantánamo) foram os ingredientes para o que chegou a ser designado como uma «tempestade perfeita», capaz de fazer desmoronar a ideia de «superpotência».

Baralhar e voltar a dar
A eleição de Barack Obama ajudou a repor alguma moderação entre estes dois extremos – da euforia dos anos 90 à depressão da era Bush. A enorme popularidade mundial do Presidente tem contribuído para a «regeneração» da imagem da América.

No discurso do Cairo, Obama ofereceu «um novo começo». Na frente diplomática, Hillary Clinton e Joe Biden têm usado a regra do bom senso: falar com todos os países, desde que eles se apresentem «de braços abertos e não com os punhos cerrados».

Na sua primeira aparição na ONU, Barack resumiu, numa frase, a atitude da «nova América» na frente externa: «Os países que, no passado, criticaram os EUA por agirem sozinhos devem, agora, contribuir para soluções conjuntas que interessem a todos».

Com mais ou menos preponderância sobre os demais, a América parece continuar a ser a «nação indispensável». Mas as teorias sobre o verdadeiro papel dos EUA nos próximos anos divergem.

No livro «After America», Paul Starobin, mestre em Relações Internacionais na London School of Economics, sentencia o «fim da hegemonia da América» e a emergência de novas potências como a China.

Poder de influência
Mais moderado, Fareed Zakaria, no muito aplaudido «O Mundo Pós-Americano», explica que o aparecimento «dos outros» (Brasil, Rússia, Índia e China) não significa que a América esteja em queda: «Este livro não trata do declínio dos Estados Unidos, mas antes da ascensão de todos os outros», avisa o editor-chefe da Newsweek, logo no início de uma obra que expõe a tese de um Mundo «multipolar».

Oito das dez universidades mais prestigiadas do Mundo são americanas. O dólar perdeu valor face ao euro, mas continua a ser moeda-referência nos grandes negócios e nas pequenas transacções.

A esperança que se depositou na eleição de Barack Obama, na mesmíssima altura em que o Mundo ocidental se afundava numa tempestade financeira e bolsista, não é comparável a nenhum processo eleitoral noutro em qualquer outra democracia.

Os Estados Unidos passaram um mau bocado nos últimos anos. E parece inegável que têm vindo a perder parte da sua hegemonia.

Mas o Prémio Nobel da Paz atribuído a Obama é mais um sinal da enorme influência que um Presidente americano pode ter na cena internacional. Antes de se decretar o «declínio da América» talvez fosse prudente não exagerar.»

Obama é Nobel da Paz (V): a reacção de Barack

Num discurso ao seu estilo, aceitou a distinção com «humildade» e encarou-o como uma «chamada para a acção». Obama considera que não o merecia pelo que que fez, mas interpreta-o como uma responsabilidade pelo que ainda tem que fazer.

Obama é Nobel da Paz (IV): o Presidente encara-o como uma «call to action»

Um artigo de Josh Gerstein e Jonathan Martin, no POLITICO.com

«President Barack Obama’s Nobel Peace Prize is quickly turning from a singular honor into a gold-medal headache, as even supporters call it premature and critics say it proves he’s a darling of the international elite.


Obama himself sought to put some distance between himself and the award, saying, “I do not view it as a recognition of my own accomplishments, but a recognition of the role of American leadership” in the world.


“To be honest, I do not feel that I deserve to be in the company of so many of the transformative figures” who won in the past, Obama said at the White House. “I will accept this award as a call to action, a call to all nations to confront the common challenges of the 21st Century.”


And seemingly mindful of the political risks involved, he seemed to go out of his way to puncture the solemnity of the moment, joking that it was also a good day because it’s his dog Bo’s birthday.


Ahead of Obama’s remarks, some Democrats argued that the Nobel Peace Prize validated Obama’s foreign policy, to the extent it’s been on display in the first nine months of his administration. But conservatives like Rush Limbaugh blasted the award as a not-so-subtle signal from the Nobel committee that they want America “neutered.”


“With this 'award' the elites of the world are urging Obama, THE MAN OF PEACE, to not do the surge in Afghanistan, not take action against Iran and its nuclear program and to basically continue his intentions to emasculate the United States," Limbaugh wrote to POLITICO.


For most winners, the Peace Prize is a recognition of a unique accomplishments for mankind. But for Obama the unexpected award could be more of a political albatross, especially at home.


At a time when Obama faces critical choices on Afghanistan, Guantanamo and other sensitive national security issues, the Nobel Committee’s action revives Republican arguments from last year’s presidential campaign that Obama is beholden to international elites looking for a dramatic break from the policies of President George W. Bush.


It could also remind many of one of Hillary Clinton’s primary critiques of Obama during last year’s presidential race: that he is praised more for his rhetoric than his actions, more for his global celebrity than any hard-and-fast accomplishments.


The official statement from the Nobel Committee praised Obama for his "efforts to strengthen international diplomacy" and saluted his announced goal of a nuclear-free world. However, the committee pointed to no concrete achievement of his fledgling presidency.


Even devoted supporters of Obama expressed amazement and a sentiment that the award was premature for a president who cannot yet point to any notable triumphs in the arena of foreign affairs — that the whole thing seemed a bit premature, like a fan letter from the European elite to the notion of Obama as a man of peace rather than a concrete recognition of anything in particular he’s achieved.


“At this point, Barack Obama is like the kid who gets a Porsche for his sixteenth birthday. It's wonderful but where can you go from there?” William Jelani Cobb, Professor of History, Spelman College, told POLITICO’s The Arena.

And it’s true, for all of Obama’s promises during the campaign, and speeches at the United Nations and elsewhere about the need for greater international cooperation, he has very little to show for it in real terms.

He hasn’t been able to enlist greater European help in Afghanistan. His efforts to broker Middle East peace have made only stinting progress. And even his own promise to close Guantanamo Bay in a year is almost certain to come up short.


He can point to some greater international cooperation in confronting Iran’s nuclear program, but the final results of that process are far off and unknown.


“I have no criticism of the president, and do think he’s had a good year in foreign policy, but I can’t for the life of me see how this helps him in a practical way on Afghanistan or any other issue. I think it would have helped a lot more if the committee had waited for at least one concrete accomplishment to go along with a better tone in American diplomacy,” said Michael O’Hanlon, a foreign policy and national security analyst at the Brookings Institution.


Seemingly aware that the award could become a political albatross for Obama, White House officials moved quickly to put a respectful distance between the president and the laurel while taking care to show some respect for the internationally-renowned distinction.


“It’s nothing anyone expected. It’s certainly nothing the president sought,” Obama senior adviser David Axelrod said on MSNBC. “I think that he’s less interested in individual honors—and this certainly is one— than in advancing the causes that the were cited by the Nobel committee.”


But one senior Democrat said Republicans already were overplaying their hand, much as some did last week when they cheered Obama’s failure to land to the 2016 Olympics for Chicago despite a personal appeal in Copenhagen.


“On balance I suspect the White House staff would have been happy to have the prize go to someone else. But the right wing has already over played this by calling the awarding of the POTUS the Nobel peace prize an 'embarrassment,' ” said one senior Democrat. “Last week they rooted against Chicago, this week they're against peace. They look ridiculous."


While the award could boost Obama’s clout on the international stage, it will also add to already-outsized expectations many foreigners have for the new U.S. president to dramatically reshape America’s relationship with the world.


And it could create a situation where any but the most hawkish choices from Obama on those fronts and the Nobel award will dovetail neatly with the right’s contentions that the president has but assuaging world opinion ahead of a hard-headed assessment of America’s interests.


Cobb and other analysts said it could actually complicate Obama’s life going forward – as he faces critical decisions on Afghanistan and how to confront Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

“But to the extent that a Nobel Peace Prize can make your life more difficult this does. . . . Now he's a Nobel laureate. But coming as he weighs his options for Afghanistan this may be, or at least seem, like an attempt to influence policy? How does a Nobel Peace Prize winner order more troops into war?” Cobb said.


In some ways, the collective shock around Washington also seemed to reflect the political reality around Obama – that he has proven to be something of a political mortal, cutting deals and making hard compromises on foreign policy that seemed starkly at odds with the idealistic tone of his campaign. The Gitmo decision is a prime example - after campaigning for two years on closing Guantanamo Bay, Obama has been forced to confront the political reality of how difficult it will be.


Last week, his odds of winning stood at 18 to 1, according to British and Irish oddsmakers. Chinese human rights activist Hu Jia was listed at 5 to 1, Zimbabwean dissident Morgan Tsvangirai at 11 to 2, and former President Bill Clinton at 8 to 1.


Many TV reports on the award Friday morning were delivered with a smirk and an air of disbelief.


When the dust settles, the biggest loser could be the credibility of the Nobel Committee itself.


For the panel, which is appointed by the Norwegian parliament, the award was clearly driven as much by hostility towards President George W. Bush’s policies as by admiration for Obama.


The official citation credited Obama for creating “a new climate in international politics” and for pushing the U.S. into “a more constructive role” on issues such as global warming.


Adding to perceptions that the award was premature: Nobel nominations were due by February 1—just 12 days after Obama took office. It’s not clear who nominated Obama.


In 2002, when the Nobel Committee honored former President Jimmy Carter for his peacemaking efforts, the panel’s chairman said he hoped the award would serve as a “kick in the leg” to Bush for his push to war in Iraq.


Obama becomes the fourth American president to win the prize. Theodore Roosevelt, who won for his work ending the Russo-Japanese War, and Woodrow Wilson, for his efforts to form the League of Nations. Jimmy Carter, who brokered a peace deal between Israel and Egypt, won after leaving office».

Obama é Nobel da Paz (III): as primeiras reacções

Watch CBS News Videos Online

Obama é Nobel da Paz (II): um prémio pelo «novo clima internacional»

«President Barack Obama won the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize on Friday for "his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples," the Norwegian Nobel Committee said, citing his outreach to the Muslim world and attempts to curb nuclear proliferation.

The committee said Mr. Obama's efforts to promote a "global response to global challenges" cemented their decision.

Mr. Obama will appear in the White House Rose Garden at 10:30
a.m. EDT, CBS News confirms.

The White House was clearly just as shocked by the announcment as the reporters gathered in Oslo, reports Maer.

It was Gibbs who eventually told Mr. Obama he had won the prestigious Prize - about 45 minutes after the announcement at 6 a.m. EDT, reports CBS News senior White House correspondent Bill Plante.

The committee praised Mr. Obama's effort to create a "new international climate" of diplomacy.

CBS News White House correspondent Mark Knoller reports that Mr. Obama is only the third U.S. President to win the Nobel Peace Prize while still in office. Theodore Roosevelt won it in 1906 and Woodrow Wilson in 1919.

Former President Jimmy Carter also won the prize in 2002, adds Knoller, but that was more than two decades after he left office.

Defending their surprising decision, the committee chairman said they sought not just to reward the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, but to "enhance" the recipient's actions - to promote peace.

"We do hope that this can contribute a little bit to enhance what he is trying to do."

"It is a clear statement to the world that we want to advocate and promote," the efforts undertaken by Mr. Obama.

"Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future," Thorbjoern Jagland, chairman of the Nobel Committee said. "In the past year Obama has been a key person for important initiatives in the U.N. for nuclear disarmament and to set a completely new agenda for the Muslim world and East-West relations."

He added that the committee endorsed "Obama's appeal that 'Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges."'

Mr. Obama's name had been mentioned in speculation before the award but many Nobel watchers believed it was too early to award the president.

"The Prize has to be seen as a political statement by the Nobel committee - meant to hail the change in U.S. policy represented by President Obama's approach to foreign policy as opposed to that of his predecessor George W. Bush," says Knoller, who notes that Mr. Obama took office less than 10 days before the Feb. 1 deadline for Nobel Prize nominations.

"This is a Prize meant as an expression of hope that President Obama's speeches and policy statements will translate into actual accomplishments," adds Knoller. "The Prize is honoring an expression of aspirations for peace, rather the achievement of it."

That decision by the Nobel Committee, however, is a caluclated risk. Knoller says the members may be discredited for awarding the Prize for aspirations, rather than accomplishments.

"I don't think anybody expected this," CBS News chief Washington correspondent and "Face the Nation" host Bob Schieffer said on Friday's "Early Show". In his mind, the prize decision was more of a commentary on the previous administration than the current U.S. President.

"It's almost as if they're saying, 'We're giving you this prize for winning the election,'" said Schieffer.

The committee said it attached special importance to Mr. Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.

"Obama has as president created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play."

In his 1895 will, Alfred Nobel stipulated that the peace prize should go "to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations and the abolition or reduction of standing armies and the formation and spreading of peace congresses."

Unlike the other Nobel Prizes, which are awarded by Swedish institutions, he said the peace prize should be given out by a five-member committee elected by the Norwegian Parliament. Sweden and Norway were united under the same crown at the time of Nobel's death.

The committee has taken a wide interpretation of Nobel's guidelines, expanding the prize beyond peace mediation to include efforts to combat poverty, disease and climate change»

in CBSnews.com

BARACK OBAMA É PRÉMIO NOBEL DA PAZ

Uma atribuição surpreendente, por ser logo no primeiro ano de mandato. Obama torna-se o terceiro Presidente americano a vencer o Nobel em funções. Análise mais pormenorizada durante o dia de hoje:

«The Norwegian Nobel Committee announced Friday that President Obama will receive the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize.

Citing Obama's "efforts to strengthen international diplomacy" and his support for nuclear arms reduction as chief reasons for the honor, the committee declared in a statement that the U.S. role in international affairs has changed substantially since the president took office.

Obama becomes the third American president to win the prize while serving in office, joining Theodore Roosevelt, who won for his work ending the Russo-Japanese War, and Woodrow Wilson, for his efforts to form the League of Nations. Obama's name had been floated as a possibility for this year's award, but he had not been viewed as a leading candidate. Most speculation had focused on Zimbabwe's reformist prime minister, Morgan Tsvangirai; Colombian Sen. Piedad Cordoba, an advocate for peace in her country; Afghan women's rights activist Sima Samar and a small number of Chinese dissident leaders. Here's the full press release from the Nobel Committee:

"The Norwegian Nobel Committee has decided that the Nobel Peace Prize for 2009 is to be awarded to President Barack Obama for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Committee has attached special importance to Obama's vision of and work for a world without nuclear weapons.

"Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama's initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.

"Only very rarely has a person to the same extent as Obama captured the world's attention and given its people hope for a better future. His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population.

"For 108 years, the Norwegian Nobel Committee has sought to stimulate precisely that international policy and those attitudes for which Obama is now the world's leading spokesman. The Committee endorses Obama's appeal that 'Now is the time for all of us to take our share of responsibility for a global response to global challenges.'"»

in POLITICO.COM

Mandar ou não mais tropas para o Afeganistão? Um dilema que Obama ainda não resolver

Robert Gibbs, o porta-voz da Casa Branca, responde a perguntas, sem ser conclusivo, sobre o Afeganistão e o Paquistão:

Oito anos depois de o regime talibã ter sido derrubado, o Afeganistão é um campo cada vez mais minado para Barack Obama...

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Mountainous terrain and harsh weather in remote parts of Afghanistan have proven a deadly combination for the U.S. military in its push to reduce mounting violence in the country.

CNN obtained this photo of a U.S. helicopter above Forward Operating Base Keating in the Nuristan province.

It was the largest number of Americans killed by hostile action in a single day since July 13, 2008, when nine troops died, according to CNN records.

The fighting was so fierce that at one point U.S. forces "had to collapse in on themselves," a U.S. military official with knowledge of the latest intelligence reports on the incident told CNN. These revelations about the battle that engulfed Forward Operating Base Keating are a further indication of how pinned down and outmanned the troops were. Watch more on the attack in rural Afghanistan »

The base was scheduled to be closed in the next few days, CNN has learned. Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the top commander in Afghanistan, wanted to cede remote outposts and consolidate troops in more populated areas to better protect Afghan civilians.

It's a point he reiterated over the summer.

"Practically speaking, there are areas that are controlled by Taliban forces," he told the Los Angeles Times in late July. Over time, McChrystal said, the command would "reduce" those areas, but the first priority will be to make sure populated areas are free of insurgent influence.

The deadly attack over the weekend and the July 2008 attack in Wanat, just 20 miles away, serve to underscore, some say, that the reduction isn't happening. View an interactive map of the two attacks »

It's an assessment that one veteran military observer discussed in a column earlier this year.

"Screwups are inevitable in war. But there are serious questions to be addressed," Foreign Policy magazine's Tom Ricks wrote in a January 2009 online article.

"As one Army source put it to me, 'The paratroopers sent to Wanat knew they were in big trouble. ... [The soldiers] ran out of water and had little material to build up their defensive positions,' " Ricks wrote.

Peter Bergen, a CNN terrorism analyst, called the repetition "a huge problem."

"It is suposed to be a lessons-learned exercise," Bergen said. "And then, exactly 20 miles away from the event about a year ago, exactly the same kind of attack happened."

In the Wanat fight, 49 U.S. troops were attacked by nearly 200 Taliban fighters, and the base was later abandoned.

"So, you have to ask yourself, what were the lessons learned? Or were the lessons not implemented? And these remote combat outposts, you know, are obviously sitting ducks," Bergen said.

The Nuristan and Wanat fights add to the growing list of problems facing the Obama administration. The White House is in the midst of a comprehensive review of U.S. strategy in Afghanistan.

McChrystal, who took over four months ago as the top U.S. commander in the country, has submitted an assessment in which, sources have told CNN, calls for additional forces to carry out a successful counterinsurgency strategy.

But some in the administration, including Vice President Joe Biden, are advocating a counterterrorism strategy focusing on combating al Qaeda and the Taliban through the use of unmanned drones and special forces without involving additional troops. Watch more on the varying advice Obama is getting »

Others believe that a broader counterinsurgency approach -- requiring a larger military operation in the country -- is needed.

Several top military leaders and opposition Republicans are pressing Obama to act quickly to increase the present 68,000-troop level by as many as 40,000. In March, Obama announced a plan to send more than 20,000 additional troops to the country to provide security for a national election.

"If we don't add more troops, you're going to see more of what happened yesterday," Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, said on "Fox News Sunday." "The security situation's going to get worse. And any hope of better governance is lost, and the Taliban will re-emerge."

Despite criticism, Obama said Tuesday that U.S. efforts in Afghanistan have had a major impact.

"Al Qaeda and its allies have not only lost operational capacity, they've lost legitimacy and credibility," he said. "We're making real progress in our core mission: to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda and other extremist networks around the world."

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Monday that the Taliban currently has the momentum in the country. He warned that a Taliban takeover of the country would empower the al Qaeda terrorist network. Watch more of Gates' remarks »


"Because of our inability and the inability, frankly, of our allies to put enough troops in Afghanistan, the Taliban do have the momentum right now," he told CNN's Christiane Amanpour and former CNN Washington Bureau Chief Frank Sesno in a panel discussion that included Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Gates said an eventual Taliban victory would provide "added space" for al Qaeda to set up in the country and enhance recruiting and fundraising, bolstered by the perception that, having driven out the Soviet Union in the 1980s, Muslim forces have won a second victory over a superpower.»

in CNNpolitics.com

O que fazer com o Afeganistão? As respostas de Hillary Clinton e Robert Gates

A secretária de Estado e o secretário da Defesa da Administração Obama falarama Christian Amanpour, da CNN, sobre a grande questão do momento na frente externa.

Lauro Cavazos, o primeiro hispânico numa Administração americana

A CNN falou com o secretário da Educação de Ronald Reagan, que abriu caminho a vários latinos que, nos anos que se seguiram, serviram em executivos dos EUA.

O dilema de Obama no Afeganistão

Um artigo de Jonathan Mann, no CNNpolitics.com:

«How much will Barack Obama bet on Afghanistan?

President Obama presents the posthumous Medal of Honor to Paul and Janet Monti whose son Sergeant First Class Jared C. Monti was killed in Afghanistan.

The U.S. President is trying to decide in an intensive series of meetings with senior officials that began this week, and he may be changing his mind.

"Right now," he said recently, "the first question is, are we doing the right thing? Are we pursuing the right strategy?"

As a candidate for the presidency, Obama declared the invasion of Iraq a diversion from America's war on terror and vowed to withdraw. By contrast, he called Afghanistan a "war of necessity" and pledged to win.

Once in the Oval Office, he shifted U.S. strategy in Afghanistan and sent more than 20,000 additional troops, bringing the current total to 68,000.

But now, roughly eight months into his presidency and eight years into the war, military and civilian casualties are setting new records. Obama's top general there is warning of the possibility of failure and is said to want for up to 40,000 more men to carry on the fight.

So the president is rethinking the central U.S. strategy for the second time in just months and his advisors are said to be split.

Vice-President Joe Biden is reportedly the highest-ranking official trying to convince Obama to bring troops home, not send more.

Under what's been dubbed "the Biden plan," the U.S. could concentrate on fighting al Qaeda rather than the Taliban. In other words, the strategy would move from counter-insurgency to counter-terrorism instead.

Part of the pressure for a new plan comes from American public opinion. CNN's most recent poll found that support for the war has fallen to a new low; just 39 percent of the public favor it. Fully 58 percent oppose it.

But Obama campaigned to win and Republicans are quick to remind him.

"He said this is a war of necessity, and I hope he'll stick to that," said his opponent in the presidential race, John McCain. "I hope and believe that he will make the right decision."

If Iraq was George Bush's war, Obama has made Afghanistan his own. Now, he's trying to decide whether to make it a much bigger one.»

Mensagem semanal: a importância dos «pequenos negócios» para a recuperação económica

Rio de Janeiro vence corrida aos Jogos de 2016: não se pode ganhar sempre Barack...

«Michelle Obama gave an impassioned speech before the International Olympics Committee. President Obama traveled overseas -- in the middle of debates over health care and Afghanistan -- to make his personal pitch to bring the 2016 Olympics to his hometown.

President Obama personally appealed to IOC members for the 2016 summer Olympic Games to be in Chicago.

But despite their efforts, the Obamas will come home empty-handed as Chicago's dreams of hosting the Games evaporated in the first round.

The news stunned those awaiting the announcement, many of whom thought the battle was between Chicago, Illinois, and Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Rio also beat out Madrid, Spain, and Tokyo, Japan, to host the games.

Although the White House says the trip was the right thing to do, some Republicans say it will have some consequences for the president.

"Other than people who like to cheer, 'We're No. 4! We're No. 4!' I don't know how this is anything but really embarrassing," Republican strategist Rich Galen said, adding that Obama's failed pitch will probably be the joke on Capitol Hill for weeks to come.

"Given the last two months starting with the August recess and all of the issues that surrounded that, I think that the White House staff, the senior staff needs to get together somewhere and figure out how they are going to fix this, because they are in a deep slump," he said.

Upon returning to the White House on Friday, Obama expressed no regret about his trip, saying it is "always a worthwhile endeavor to promote and boost the United States."

"One of the things that I think is most valuable about sports is that you can play a great game and still not win," the president said. "Although I wish that we had come back with better news from Copenhagen, I could not be prouder of my hometown of Chicago."

White House senior adviser David Axelrod said that although the results were "disappointing," Obama did the best he could.

"The president made, I think, a very strong appeal, and it didn't work out. But it was well worth the effort. Any time this president has a chance to go and promote the interests of this country and promote the interests of a city or a state within this country on something of this magnitude, he's going to take that opportunity," he said.

Axelrod said Obama's appeal wasn't strong enough to overcome the "internal currents," pointing out that former IOC President Juan Antonio Samaranch was among those leading the bid to bring the games to Madrid.

"I think there were other things that played there that we simply couldn't overcome, and that's life. Life goes on," he said.

U.S. Rep. Danny Davis, a Chicago Democrat, said the loss is "kind of heartbreaking. ... A tremendous amount of effort has been put into trying to win the bid."

It wasn't a mistake for Obama to make the trip, Davis said.

"I think the president did what we would expect him to do, and that is show leadership," he said.

Obama spent just four hours in Copenhagen and flew back before the announcement was made.

The president also met with his commander in Afghanistan, Gen. Stanley McChrystal, aboard Air Force One, following up on a Wednesday meeting with his national security team on how to proceed on the war, the White House said.

Before his trip, critics questioned whether Obama should leave the country to make his pitch, given his already full plate.

"Listen, I think it's a great idea to promote Chicago, but he's the president of the United States, not the mayor of Chicago," House Minority Leader John Boehner said, Politico reported. "And the problems we have here at home affect all Americans, and that's where his attention ought to be."

Last month, when the Obamas hosted an event on the White House lawn to rally support for Chicago's bid, Obama was against making the trip.

"I would make the case in Copenhagen personally, if I weren't so firmly committed to making -- making real the promise of quality, affordable health care for every American," the president said.

But the administration had little choice but to raise the stakes, White House officials said, given that the other competitors all were sending their heads of state to Copenhagen.

CNN senior political correspondent Candy Crowley said Obama's failure to bring the Games to Chicago won't cause any enduring political damage.

"It opens him to criticism and it makes it difficult for him for a while. But will it mean NATO isn't going to send more troops to Afghanistan because he didn't get the Olympics? No. Does it mean that any Republican or Democrat will change their mind on health care? No.

"He's going to be in a lot bigger trouble if he doesn't deliver on health care, believe me," she said.»

in CNNpolitics.com

Tim Pawlenty, governador do Minnesota, já prepara a candidatura presidencial em 2012

«Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty has been quietly assembling the blueprint of a presidential campaign and will announce Thursday the support of a group of high-level political strategists and donors, complemented by a handful of top new media consultants, POLITICO has learned.

Pawlenty, under the radar of D.C.’s political community, has locked up some of the key operatives who engineered then-President George W. Bush’s reelection campaign — a significant feat for a little-known Midwestern politician.

The moves underscore, and will lend credence to, the emerging belief among many establishment Republicans that Pawlenty is becoming the sole viable alternative to former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, a potential Republican primary rival. The Minnesota governor has even gone so far as to contact some of Romney’s former supporters.

Pawlenty, who previously has had little political infrastructure, is now being advised by a trio of GOP consultants with presidential experience: Terry Nelson, Sara Taylor and Phil Musser.

And in formally opening his political action committee, Freedom First, Thursday, Pawlenty will also announce two co-chairmen, William Strong, a Morgan Stanley vice chairman, and former Rep. Vin Weber (R-Minn.), both of whom are heavyweight GOP figures, along with a list of prominent Minnesota donors.

In addition to a high-dollar gala launch for the PAC in Minneapolis in November, Pawlenty is planning a Washington fundraiser for late October designed to acquaint the governor with the Beltway’s most influential Republicans. Helping to coordinate the governor’s GOP outreach in the nation’s capital is Sam Geduldig, a well-connected lobbyist and former senior aide to Reps. John Boehner and Roy Blunt.

Serving as the PAC’s counsel is Michael Toner, a veteran campaign lawyer in Washington. Alex Conant, a native Minnesotan and former Republican National Committee spokesman, will serve as communications director.

The governor has also inked political technology consultants Patrick Ruffini, Mindy Finn, Patrick Hynes and Liz Mair to develop what Pawlenty advisers hope will be the most sophisticated new-media presence of any Republican in the nation. Pawlenty launches a new website, www.timpawlenty.com, Thursday.

The second-term Minnesota governor, who is not seeking reelection next year, is focused on twin political goals, his advisers say: helping elect two Republican governors this fall from his perch as Republican Governors Association vice chairman and using his PAC to aid like-minded candidates running in next year’s midterm elections.

But Pawlenty is doing far more than that to establish his presence in the minds of Republican voters.

He is also traveling the country at a fevered clip, appearing at scores of GOP and conservative events to speak to the party faithful, and becoming a frequent national TV presence, especially on cable television, where he’s able to offer sharp critiques of President Barack Obama’s latest moves.

And behind the scenes, he’s engaged in a far more subtle campaign against another possible presidential rival.

Pawlenty has been phoning aides and advisers to Romney’s 2008 campaign, ostensibly to introduce himself and solicit their advice.

One midlevel Romney aide who got a call suggested the Minnesotan was targeting younger operatives who may be open to another candidate in 2012 should the former Massachusetts governor stock the senior levels of his next potential run with the same cast as last time.

Pawlenty also recently reached out to another well-known Romney supporter from a key early-primary state, asking questions about the state’s political dynamics.


“Not a lot of people outside of Minnesota know Gov. Pawlenty very well, and as he tries to help Republicans around the country, it makes sense for him to reach out to a lot of people,” said Conant, when asked about the forward-leaning tactics. “As he puts together a team to run the PAC with a focus on 2010, he wants the best people available.”


But such conversations have another effect, as Pawlenty and his team are well aware —they serve notice to the small community of political insiders that the governor is serious about a White House run.

The same can be said about the selection of Weber as co-chairman of his PAC. The former Minnesota congressman-turned-GOP lobbyist and strategist was an early backer of Romney’s primary run, serving as campaign policy chairman and a close adviser.


“I’m a free agent,” Weber said when asked about his 2012 loyalties, noting he had told senior Romney officials about his decision to help lead Pawlenty’s PAC. He was emphatic that his efforts for Pawlenty are about 2010 — “doing something positive for the Republican Party” — and not the next presidential race.


Pawlenty is holding one-on-one meetings with Republicans nearly everywhere he goes and is going to some lengths to make sure his message is correctly calibrated. Before the recent Family Research Council’s Value Voters Summit, for example, he held a conference call with a team of advisers, including pollster Tony Fabrizio and longtime conservative strategist Greg Mueller, to help shape his speech and general approach at an event where he got rave reviews and finished a surprising third in the straw poll.


Further, Pawlenty has used public appearances and op-eds to criticize the health care plan Romney put in place in Massachusetts.


Taken together, Pawlenty’s efforts reflect a Republican trying to carve out a niche for himself in the very early 2012 jockeying. Before anyone else enters the arena, he’s seeking to win over Republicans who are reluctant, or downright unwilling, to embrace Romney and who think that other potential candidates — notably former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and former Alaska Gov. and vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin — are nonstarters in a general election.


“Who else is a credible alternative that’s going to have a national campaign infrastructure?” asked one Republican operative, listing only Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) as another potential entrant, before noting that the senator has done little to suggest he’s interested in challenging Obama.


“There are basically two guys who are electable conservatives,” said another plugged-in Republican, assessing a field that right now seems notably thin.


Yet Pawlenty lacks a few important strengths that some of his possible opponents enjoy. He doesn’t have the ability to finance his own campaign as Romney does, nor does he maintain anything close to the former presidential hopeful’s donor and grass-roots base. He lacks Huckabee’s natural hold on social conservatives. And he’s never going to enjoy a fervent following like the one Palin can point to.


It’s also not entirely clear what Pawlenty’s signature issues will be, since there is no overarching accomplishment in St. Paul that he could clearly run on.


Pawlenty’s early maneuvering, however, could address one of the political class’s early raps against him: that, while he may be a young and appealing conservative from a blue state, he lacks the organization or capacity to raise the kind of money needed to win the presidential nomination.


Nelson initially ran Sen. John McCain’s presidential campaign in 2007 and was the national political director on the Bush-Cheney reelection campaign in 2004. Taylor was also a senior official on the Bush campaign and did a stint as White House political director at the start of his second term. Musser ran the Republican Governors Association in 2006 and advised Romney at the outset of his 2008 White House run. Fabrizio and Mueller have also worked on GOP presidential campaigns.


Strong was a Ranger, or top Bush fundraising bundler, in 2004 and for McCain. He’s joined by a group of Minnesotans, including former Target CEO Bob Ulrich, GOP strategist Jeff Larson and TCF Financial Corp. CEO Bill Cooper.


Pawlenty’s team also includes a number of operatives who worked for different candidates in the last GOP primary. On the Web team alone are individuals from the campaigns of McCain, Romney and Rudy Giuliani.


A group of Pawlenty loyalists in Minnesota, Trisha Hamm, Annie Kelly and Don Stiles, will help run the business side of the St. Paul-based PAC.»

in POLITICO.com

Obama e Oprah vão a Copenhaga fazer campanha pelos Jogos Olímpicos de Chicago-2016