Political Ruminations

Full Video of the Third Presidential Debate

This was the final debate of the President’s political career, and it was a debate about foreign policy. President Obama won it by any means of measurement; he was masterful, and Mitt Romney came across as a neophyte. Watch:

You can read the full text transcript of the debate here.

Mitt Romney is a Lying Liar: Obama Ties to Israel Are Strong

In the third presidential debate tonight, Romney claimed that his ties to Israel are stronger than those of President Obama. I don’t think so, and evidently, neither does Israeli President Shimon Peres:

“I think under President Obama we have the best relationship on the issue of security. Never were the security [...] needs better met than today under president Obama.”

Nor does Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak agree with Romney’s assessment:

“I don’t think that anyone can raise any question mark about the devotion of this president to the security of Israel.”

And “Efraim Halevy, former chief of Israel’s spy agency the Mossad, said in two separate interviews on Sunday and Monday that President Obama’s approach toward Iran has been “courageous” and “brave.””:

“Negotiating with Iran is perceived as a sign of beginning to forsake Israel. That is where I think the basic difference is between Romney and Obama. What Romney is doing is mortally destroying any chance of a resolution without war. Therefore when [he recently] said, he doesn’t think there should be a war with Iran, this does not ring true. It is not consistent with other things he has said.”

Mitt Romney Pledge to Score Political Points off an American Foreign Policy Tragedy

Remember the secret video………the 47 percent video? In that same video, or the full length version of it, Mitt Romney had an exchange with an audience member in which Romney said he would “work to find a way to take advantage of the opportunity”. The “opportunity” Romney referred to was a foreign policy crisis.

In the first section of the quoted conversation between Mitt Romney and one of his fellow plutocrats (an audience member), the audience member suggests that Romney “sort of duplicate” the scenario which got Ronald Reagan elected, emphasis mine:

Audience member: If you get the call as president, and you had hostages…Ronald Reagan was able to make a statement, even before he became, was actually sworn in—

Romney: Yeah—

Audience member: the hostages were released—

Romney: on the day of his inauguration, yeah.

Audience member: So my question is, really, how can you sort of duplicate that scenario?

Romney: Ohhhh [A few chuckles in audience.] I'm gonna ask you, how do I duplicate that scenario.

Audience member: I think that had to do with the fact that the Iranians perceived Reagan would do something to really get them out. In other words [unintelligible]…and that's why I'm suggesting that something that you say over the next few months gets the Iranians to understand that their pursuit of the bomb is something that you would predict and I think that's something that could possibly resonate very well with American Republican voters.

Of course, we now know exactly how Reagan achieved the release of the hostages and won the presidency.

In 1980, when Carter was on the verge of achieving the release of the hostages, Ronald Reagan’s people told the Iranians that if they would wait  to release the hostages until right after the election, Reagan would give them a sweet arms deal. This eventually resulted in the Iran Contra scandal, and Jimmy Carter lost re-election because Republicans will do anything to win.

Back to 2012 when Mitt Romney’s response to his fellow plutocrat in the audience of the Boca Raton fundraiser was not to strongly dismiss the notion of using Americans at risk of harm to win a political advantage. No, Mitt Romney’s cold, calculated response was to tell the plutocrat that Romney would find a way to take advantage of a foreign policy crisis to score political points, emphasis mine:

Romney: I appreciate the idea. I can't—one of the other things that's frustrating to me is that at a typical day like this, when I do three or four events like this, the number of foreign policy questions that I get are between zero and one. And the American people are not concentrated at all on China, on Russia, Iran, Iraq. This president's failure to put in place a status forces agreement allowing 10-20,000 troops to stay in Iraq? Unthinkable! And yet, in that election, in the Jimmy Carter election, the fact that we have hostages in Iran, I mean, that was all we talked about. And we had the two helicopters crash in the desert, I mean that's—that was—that was the focus, and so him solving that made all the difference in the world. I'm afraid today if you said, "We got Iran to agree to stand down a nuclear weapon," they'd go hold on. It's really a, but…by the way, if something of that nature presents itself, I will work to find a way to take advantage of the opportunity.

Romney found his “opportunity” in the Benghazi attack which killed four Americans, and as he told his fellow plutocrat he would do, Romney moved to score political points by blaming President Obama and his administration for the attack, claiming that it was a result of “perceived weakness”:

“We have seen a foreign policy of weakness and decline in American influence and respect. Yesterday, we saw the consequences of this perceived weakness.”

Mitt Romney cares only about achieving the power of the American presidency. He cares little for the well being of his American countrymen. Remember this as you watch the foreign policy debate tonight, and vote accordingly.

30,000 Pro-America Protesters in Libya Attack Islamist Militia Compound

This makes my heart sing.

Via Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs comes a story of 30,000 pro-America Libyan protesters who attacked an Islamist militia compound in Benghazi on Friday, and took it apart, chanting things such as “We want justice for [Ambassador] Stevens" and "No more al-Qaida!",emphasis mine:

An amazing story from Libya today, where pro-America protesters staged a huge demonstration, and stormed and ransacked the base of the main radical Islamist militia: Libyan Demonstrators Wreck Militia Compound in Benghazi.

Hundreds of Libyan protesters forced members of the main Salafist militia out of their base in the second city of Benghazi Friday, setting fire to and wrecking the military compound.

The assault came as an estimated 30,000 people rallied against the influence of the militias in the city, drowning out a protest by radical Salafists angry over a film and cartoons deemed offensive to Islam.

“No to armed formations” and “Yes to the Libya army” read banners raised by protesters gathered at the city’s Tibesti Hotel before marching to Al-Kish Square, close to the barracks of several militia brigades.

“Our law is God’s law, not the law of the jungle,” women chanted.

Banners also paid tribute to U.S. ambassador Chris Stevens, who was killed along with three Americans on September 11 in what the White House now calls a terrorist attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi.

“Libya lost a friend” and “We want justice for Stevens,” signs read.

Make no mistake. This has happened because of President Obama’s foreign policy acuity. This is the kind of leadership we need not only in this country, but in the world at large.

The image is of “an armed Libyan man flashes the victory sign in front of a fire at the hardline Islamist group Ansar el-Sharia headquarters in Benghazi”, and the photo credit goes to Abdullah Doma-AFP.

Ambassador Susan Rice: U.S. Will Prevent Iran From Acquiring a Nuclear Weapon

On CNN's "State of the Union" this morning, Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice talked about the U.S. commitment to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon:

“President Obama has been absolutely clear and on this there's absolutely no daylight between the United States and Israel, that we will do what it takes to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. We are not at that stage yet. They do not have a nuclear weapon. Our shared intelligence assessments is that there is still considerable time and space before they will have a nuclear weapon should they make the decision to go for that.”

Morning Quote: Bob Cesca

Bob Cesca on Mitt Romney’s pathetically un-presidential reaction to the events in Libya and Cairo on Wednesday:

“They [Republicans] confuse obnoxious loudness with foreign policy expertise.

The opposite of a foreign policy neophyte isn’t a scolding jerkass who pops off with saber-rattling platitudes and political attacks. Romney could have been a statesman about the events in Libya and Cairo and appeared dignified — perhaps qualified in the process, but instead he decided to be a braying dick. Anyone with a lapel pin and a pulse can do that. Braying dickishness doesn’t amount to anything resembling international leadership gravitas.”

Flashback Quote: Mitt Romney

In an op-ed published by the National Review on April 21, 2011, Mitt Romney criticized President Obama for his action in Libya, quoting neocon right wing reactionary (and former UN ambassador), John Bolton, who predicted the failure of the mission to remove Qaddafi from power even as the president had restricted the use of military force to “the limited objective of protecting civilians”:

“It is apparent that our military is engaged in much more than enforcing a no-fly zone. What we are watching in real time is another example of mission creep and mission muddle. In an op-ed in today’s Boston Herald, former U.N. ambassador John Bolton rightly notes that Obama has set himself up for “massive strategic failure” by demanding Qaddafi’s ouster “while restricting military force to the limited objective of protecting civilians.” Military action cannot be under-deliberated and ad hoc. The president owes it to the American people and Congress to immediately explain his new Libya mission and its strategic rationale.”

The neocons weren't upset about an action which could have cost American lives. No. They were upset because President Obama sought to prevent a genocide even as he restricted military action to defending civilians. Obama's refusal to jump into Libya and just take over by force was derided by every neocon in the warmongering Republican Party. Happily, Pres. Obama remained firm, and the Libyan action was a rousing success.

Morning Quote: Barack Obama

President Obama to CBS News on Romney’s incredibly unknowledgeable and self-serving blunders into the foreign policy arena yesterday:

“There's a broader lesson to be learned here: Governor Romney seems to have a tendency to shoot first and aim later.”

For a reprise of the [political]events of yesterday, read “Mitt Romney Kneejerks Into Another Colossal Blunder”.

Romney Inserts Scary Foot in Foreign Policy

Yesterday, 4 Americans were killed in the attack on the American embassy in Libya. The GOP’s presidential nominee, Mitt Romney, released a statement in which he implied that the president is a terrorist sympathizer:

“ I'm outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi. It's disgraceful that the Obama Administration's first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks. ”

Of course, it isn’t true and Mitt Romney, the Lying Liar, should never have said such a thing, emphasis mine:

The assertion that the administration sympathized with attackers was derived from a statement by the U.S. Embassy in Cairo — before the compound was breached — criticizing an anti-Muslim film that "hurt the religious feelings" of others. Even after coming under attack, the Embassy spent much of the day defending and reasserting the statement on Twitter.

Bob Cesca on the event and the  aftermath:

Romney, in his haste, attacked the president and a U.S. Embassy in Cairo statement about a crappy anti-Islamic movie released in the United States. Romney said the embassy statement apologized for America and implied that it was issued following the deadly attack and killing of four U.S. diplomats in Libya, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens. In fact, the statement was released before the killings and the statement didn’t apologize for America or American values and, instead, literally defended American values.

Worse, Romney rushed to score political points on the attack before having all of the facts.

Romney said, “The embassy in Cairo put out a statement after their grounds had been breached, protesters were inside the grounds. They reiterated that statement after the breach. I think it’s a — a terrible course for America to stand in apology for our values.” [….]

That’s simply not the case. And this kind of response it utterly baffling, especially given the lack of information regarding why the Libya attack occurred. Officials believe the Libya attack, unlike the movie-related attacks in Cairo, were motivated by revenge for the killing of a member of al-Qaeda.

“It’s bad,” said a former aide to Senator John McCain’s 2008 presidential campaign. “Just on a factual level that the statement was not a response but preceding, or one could make the case precipitating. And just calling it a ‘disgrace’ doesn’t really cut it. Not ready for prime time.”

A third Republican, a former Bush State Department official, told BuzzFeed, “It wasn’t presidential of Romney to go political immediately — a tragedy of this magnitude should be something the nation collectively grieves before politics enters the conversation.”

Continue reading Cesca’s post….

UPDATE: 

A Timeline Of The Attacks In Libya And Egypt — And The Responses

Obama on Mitt Romney’s Foreign Policy Experience

Obama on Mitt Romney’s lack of foreign policy experience, and with his seeming ineptitude in relating to other countries:

“My opponent and his running mate are new to foreign policy, but from all that we’ve seen and heard, they want to take us back to an era of blustering and blundering that cost America so dearly.

After all, you don’t call Russia our number one enemy – and not al Qaeda – unless you’re still stuck in a Cold War time warp. You might not be ready for diplomacy with Beijing if you can’t visit the Olympics without insulting our closest ally. My opponent said it was “tragic” to end the war in Iraq, and he won’t tell us how he’ll end the war in Afghanistan. I have, and I will.”

Quote of the Day: Joe Biden Rips Mitt Romney on Foreign Policy

At a campaign stop in York, Pennsylvania today, Vice President Joe Biden tore into Mitt Romney’s foreign policy positions:

“ Listen to what he says about foreign policy, you caught some of it in his [convention] speech. He said it was a mistake to end the war in Iraq and bring all of our warriors home. He said it was a mistake to set an end date for our warriors in Afghanistan and bring them home. He implies by the speech that he’s ready to go to war in Syria and Iran. He wants to move from cooperation to confrontation with Putin’s Russia. And these guys say the president’s out of touch? Out of touch? Swiss bank account, untold millions in the Cayman Islands. Who’s out of touch, man? ”

Adding….of note is the fact that during his nomination  acceptance speech, Romney never mentioned Iraq, the U.S. troops or Afghanistan. I find his lack of a call-out to U.S. troops fairly despicable, but I guess that’s what we should expect from a guy who was a draft dodger and never served at all. Romney avoided Viet Nam by spending two years as a missionary in France. Image Credit: Carolyn Kaster/AP

Quote of the Day

Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel during an interview with the LA Times on Romney’s gaffes relating to U.S. allies overseas:

“I don’t know how he’ll handle the head of state job. He’s made a mess of being a tourist.”

Willard is a simple fuck-up. Or, as my source close to (back in the day) Willard’s Dad aka George Romney has said  “He’s [Mitt Romney] a jerk. He was a jerk as a kid, and he’s a jerk now.” Must be why George Romney's former lieutenant governor, Bill Milliken, has not endorsed Mitt.

Quote of the Day: Wikileaks Boring

Dan Drezner of Foreign Policy Magazine:

“This kind of docu-dump says more about Wikileaks and Anonymous than it does about anything else.  Wikileaks thinks it's groundbreaking that Stratfor CEO George Friedman had contact with Bush administration power-broker Karl Rove in the fall of 2011.  I read the e-mail exchange, and if you think that's groundbreaking, you need to read more interesting things on the interwebs.”

Heh.

Via  Andrew Sullivan

Morning Quote: President Obama on Iran

“My goal is to try to resolve this diplomatically.”

- President Obama responds to a question from Matt Lauer (Feb. 5 interview) on whether the President would use force to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

Full Text Transcript: 2012 State of the Union Address

Watch President Obama deliver the SOTU here.


Both images are screenshots.

Read the full text transcript of the 2012 State of the Union Address:

As Prepared for Delivery -

THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice President, members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow Americans:

Last month, I went to Andrews Air Force Base and welcomed home some of our last troops to serve in Iraq. Together, we offered a final, proud salute to the colors under which more than a million of our fellow citizens fought - and several thousand gave their lives.

 

We gather tonight knowing that this generation of heroes has made the United States safer and more respected around the world. For the first time in nine years, there are no Americans fighting in Iraq. For the first time in two decades, Osama bin Laden is not a threat to this country. Most of al Qaeda's top lieutenants have been defeated. The Taliban's momentum has been broken, and some troops in Afghanistan have begun to come home.

Morning Quote: Andrew Sullivan on Obama’s Foreign Policy Accomplishments

“On foreign policy, the right-wing critiques have been the most unhinged. Romney accuses the president of apologizing for America, and others all but accuse him of treason and appeasement. Instead, Obama reversed Bush’s policy of ignoring Osama bin Laden, immediately setting a course that eventually led to his capture and death. And when the moment for decision came, the president overruled both his secretary of state and vice president in ordering the riskiest—but most ambitious—plan on the table. He even personally ordered the extra helicopters that saved the mission. It was a triumph, not only in killing America’s primary global enemy, but in getting a massive trove of intelligence to undermine al Qaeda even further. If George Bush had taken out bin Laden, wiped out al Qaeda’s leadership, and gathered a treasure trove of real intelligence by a daring raid, he’d be on Mount Rushmore by now. But where Bush talked tough and acted counterproductively, Obama has simply, quietly, relentlessly decimated our real enemies, while winning the broader propaganda war. Since he took office, al Qaeda’s popularity in the Muslim world has plummeted.

Obama’s foreign policy, like Dwight Eisenhower’s or George H.W. Bush’s, eschews short-term political hits for long-term strategic advantage. It is forged by someone interested in advancing American interests—not asserting an ideology and enforcing it regardless of the consequences by force of arms. By hanging back a little, by “leading from behind” in Libya and elsewhere, Obama has made other countries actively seek America’s help and reappreciate our role. As an antidote to the bad feelings of the Iraq War, it has worked close to perfectly.”

- Conservative-Independent, Andrew Sullivan, on Obama’s foreign policy accomplishments, from a really excellent cover story for Newsweek.

Adding........you should read the entire piece. It’s not only brilliant, but it tells the truth about the Obama presidency in a way that hasn’t been done before.  While I disagree with Sullivan on several points (the most egregious point being that Obama signed indefinite detention of American citizens into law. Indefinite detention of American citizens was not “signed into law” by President Obama, it was already law, a fact which Sullivan does not point out.)

BREAKING: Text of President Obama Signing Statement on the NDAA

Full text of Signing Statement by President Obama on H.R. 1540 (also known as the NDAA):

Today I have signed into law H.R. 1540, the “National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2012.” I have signed the Act chiefly because it authorizes funding for the defense of the United States and its interests abroad, crucial services for service members and their families, and vital national security programs that must be renewed. In hundreds of separate sections totaling over 500 pages, the Act also contains critical Administration initiatives to control the spiraling health care costs of the Department of Defense (DoD), to develop counterterrorism initiatives abroad, to build the security capacity of key partners, to modernize the force, and to boost the efficiency and effectiveness of military operations worldwide.

Morning Quote: Herman Cain

“President Obama called for the removal of Gaddafi. Just want to make sure we're talking about the same thing before I say, yes I agree, I know I didn't agree. I do not agree with the way he handled it for the following reason -- no, that's a different one. I gotta go back to... Got all this stuff twirling around in my head. Specifically, what are you asking me, did I agree or not disagree with on what?”

- GOP presidential candidate, and intellectual powerhouse, Herman Cain in response to a Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel interviewer who asked Cain “So you agreed with President Obama on Libya or not?”.

Image credit: Mike De Sisti

Morning Quote: President Barack Obama

“They're wrong. Waterboarding is torture. Anybody who has actually read about and understands the practice of waterboarding would say that that is torture. And that's not something we do -- period.”

- President Obama on waterboarding - torture, responding to Herman Cain and Michele Bachmann, who both stated (during the debate Sat., Nov. 12) that they would approve the use of waterboarding if he/she were to win the presidency.

Morning Quote: Herman Cain

“I challenge anybody to say that I wouldn’t know how to approach foreign policy, because unlike some of the other people I at least have a foreign policy philosophy, which is an extension of the Reagan philosophy, peace through strength, and my philosophy is peace through strength and clarity... All of the details for each individual situation we got plenty of experts, but what a leader must do is be able to state some fundamental principles, fundamental philosophy, listen to the input, and make judgments.”

- Republican presidential hopeful, Herman Cain.

Via Andrew Sullivan

Morning Quote: Andrew Sullivan

“To rid the world of Osama bin Laden, Anwar al-Awlaki and Moammar Qaddafi within six months: if Obama were a Republican, he'd be on Mount Rushmore by now.”

- Andrew Sullivan, referring to President Obama's national security - foreign policy accomplishments.

Via Bob Cesca

Morning Quote

Via Steve Benen, Eli Lake on Twitter:

Eli Lake, a national security correspondent for the unabashedly conservative Washington Times and not exactly a fan of President Obama, raised a point on Twitter that the right probably didn’t care for. (via Zack Beauchamp)

“Worth noting. President Birth Certificate has done what Reagan and W could not: end Gadhafi's reign and kill bin Laden. #realkeeping”

VIDEO; The Queen of England Toasts President Obama

Image courtesy of MSNBC.

Of note is the fact that this was only the second state dinner ever hosted by the British for an American president, and likely came about due to the Obamas’ friendship with the queen, emphasis mine:

LONDON — In the splendor of Buckingham Palace and even a fast game of table tennis with British kids, President Barack Obama spent a full day of his European tour on Tuesday tending to and underlining the importance of U.S. relations with England. Along the way, baby boomers Barack and Michelle Obama cemented their deepening friendship with the 85-year-old queen.

In toasting Queen Elizabeth II at only the second state dinner the British have ever thrown for an American president, Obama called her "a living witness to the power of our alliance and a chief source of its resilience."

Watch it:
Despite my best efforts to manipulate the code to stop auto-playing the video, I still can’t make it happen. Thus, rather than annoy everyone, I removed the video. To view the video, click here or on the image of the vid below. Sorry for any inconvenience.

Wasting Taxpayer Money to Score Cheap Political Points

Sen. Orrin Hatch wants a resolution to condemn President Obama’s reiteration of a policy that’s only existed for decades under both Democratic and Republican administrations.

Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch (R) announced Friday he would introduce a congressional resolution disapproving of President Obama’s stance on Israel’s border lines, saying that “threatens Israel’s security.”

“By calling for a return to the pre-1967 borders, President Obama has directly undermined her,” Hatch said of Israel.

It always amazes me how Republicans can twist, turn, and outright lie with a straight face; it should also enrage Republicans since Hatch, and others like him, evidently believe that their base is stupid. Steve Benen:

Hatch isn’t some rookie backbencher who got elected on a fluke. He knows full well what he’s saying is ridiculous.

Hatch knows President Obama did not actually call for a return to pre-1967 borders. He knows Obama did what people involved in the process have always done — identified these borders as a starting point for talks, with the understanding that they would be altered to account for Israeli settlements in the West Bank with land swaps. He knows that this has been U.S. policy for decades, as well as the common standard for the international diplomatic community.

Hatch knows all of this, but he intends to push a resolution of condemnation anyway, because he’s a shameless hack.

What’s more, whether he appreciates the larger dynamic or not, by undermining U.S. foreign policy on purpose, Hatch’s hysterics hinder the Middle East peace process itself.

Right Wing Trying to Paint Pres. Obama as a Wannabe Dictator

The right wing blogosphere is making a huge deal out of a remark made by President Obama, reported by the New York Times, and taken out of context by the right wing. The New York Times, emphasis by mmfa:

“Striking a very balanced, and in many ways, neutral approach is recognized by many people in the region as not being with them, or on their side," said J. Scott Mastic, the head of Middle East and North Africa for the International Republican Institute. "It's very important that we be seen as supporting the demands of the people in the region.”

How Mr. Obama manages to do that while also balancing American interests is a question that officials acknowledge will plague this historic president for months to come. Mr. Obama has told people that it would be so much easier to be the president of China. As one official put it, "No one is scrutinizing Hu Jintao's words in Tahrir Square."

As you can see from the screenshot, Fox Nation blew it all out of proportion.

Bill Kristol responds on the Weekly Standard blog:

Mr. Obama is right.

If you're president of China, people around the world who are fighting for freedom don't really expect you to help. If you're president of China, you don't have to put up with annoying off-year congressional elections, and then negotiate your budget with a bunch of gun-and-religion-clinging congressmen and senators. If you're president of China, you can fund your national public radio to your heart's content.

Income Inequality in the US and Egypt

The protests we’re witnessing in #Egypt are a reaction to Egypt’s stagnating economy, and the overwhelming poverty that exists in the ancient country.

Shockingly, the U.S. is behind Egypt in income inequality. Think Progress has the story [emphasis mine]:

Protests in Egypt continued for a seventh day today, and pro-democracy demonstrators are organizing a “march of millions” to take place tomorrow. As financial markets dip across the Middle East, financial prognosticators are trying to divine what continued unrest will mean for the economies of the Middle East and the price of oil.

One of the driving factors behind the protests is the decades-long stagnation of the Egyptian economy and a growing sense of inequality. “They’re all protesting about growing inequalities, they’re all protesting against growing nepotism. The top of the pyramid was getting richer and richer,” said Emile Hokayem of the International Institute for Strategic Studies in the Middle East.

As Yasser El-Shimy, former diplomatic attaché at the Egyptian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, wrote in Foreign Policy, “income inequality has reached levels not before seen in Egypt’s modern history.” But Egypt still bests quite a few countries when it comes to income inequality, including the United States:[……]

Video & Transcript: 2011 State of the Union Address by President Obama

Watch President Obama’s State of the Union address, or read the full text transcript below the video:

Remarks by the President in State of Union Address

United States Capitol, Washington, D.C.

9:12 P.M. EST

      THE PRESIDENT:  Mr. Speaker, Mr. Vice President, members of Congress, distinguished guests, and fellow Americans:

      Tonight I want to begin by congratulating the men and women of the 112th Congress, as well as your new Speaker, John Boehner.  (Applause.)  And as we mark this occasion, we’re also mindful of the empty chair in this chamber, and we pray for the health of our colleague -- and our friend -– Gabby Giffords.  (Applause.)

Der Spiegel on the Latest Wikileaks Document Release

Embarrassment matters. In diplomatic circles, it matters a lot. Der Spiegel, emphasis mine.

Such surprises from the annals of US diplomacy will dominate the headlines in the coming days when the New York Times, London's Guardian, Paris' Le Monde, Madrid's El Pais  and SPIEGEL begin shedding light on the treasure trove of secret documents from the State Department. Included are 243,270 diplomatic cables filed by US embassies to the State Department and 8,017 directives that the State Department sent to its diplomatic outposts around the world. In the coming days, the participating media will show in a series of investigative stories how America seeks to steer the world. The development is no less than a political meltdown for American foreign policy.

Never before in history has a superpower lost control of such vast amounts of such sensitive information -- data that can help paint a picture of the foundation upon which US foreign policy is built. Never before has the trust America's partners have in the country been as badly shaken. Now, their own personal views and policy recommendations have been made public -- as have America's true views of them.

H/T Das Gelbe Forum

Update on Wikileaks Document Release

The New York Times has a number of documents already online for your viewing, along with several articles on the current batch of releases. One of the articles speaks to consequences for the world [emphasis mine].:

The anticipated disclosure of the cables is already sending shudders through the diplomatic establishment, and could conceivably strain relations with some countries, influencing international affairs in ways that are impossible to predict.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and American ambassadors around the world have been contacting foreign officials in recent days to alert them to the expected disclosures. A statement from the White House on Sunday said: “We condemn in the strongest terms the unauthorized disclosure of classified documents and sensitive national security information.”