Cher Mr Chomsky, j'ai beaucoup d'estime pour vous. Alors, s'il vous plait, pourriez pas attendre encore un peu avant de casser mes illusions sur Obama ?
Il a quand même gelé Gitmo hier et le 1er chef d'état qu'il a appelé est Mahmoud Abbas, c'est pas rien quand même.
élection US ; Chomsky frappe fort !
white house 2.0 ... (suite)
Un très intéressant article du New-York Times sur l'utilisation des réseaux sociaux par le candidat Obama.
How Obama Tapped Into Social Networks’ Power
By DAVID CARR
In February 2007, a friend called Marc Andreessen, a founder of Netscape and a board member of Facebook, and asked if he wanted to meet with a man with an idea that sounded preposterous on its face.
Always game for something new, Mr. Andreessen headed to the San Francisco airport late one night to hear the guy out. A junior member of a large and powerful organization with a thin, but impressive, résumé, he was about to take on far more powerful forces in a battle for leadership.
He wondered if social networking, with its tremendous communication capabilities and aggressive database development, might help him beat the overwhelming odds facing him.
“It was like a guy in a garage who was thinking of taking on the biggest names in the business,” Mr. Andreessen recalled. “What he was doing shouldn’t have been possible, but we see a lot of that out here and then something clicks. He was clearly supersmart and very entrepreneurial, a person who saw the world and the status quo as malleable.”
And as it turned out, President-elect Barack Obama was right.
Like a lot of Web innovators, the Obama campaign did not invent anything completely new. Instead, by bolting together social networking applications under the banner of a movement, they created an unforeseen force to raise money, organize locally, fight smear campaigns and get out the vote that helped them topple the Clinton machine and then John McCain and the Republicans.
As a result, when he arrives at 1600 Pennsylvania, Mr. Obama will have not just a political base, but a database, millions of names of supporters who can be engaged almost instantly. And there’s every reason to believe that he will use the network not just to campaign, but to govern. His e-mail message to supporters on Tuesday night included the line, “We have a lot of work to do to get our country back on track, and I’ll be in touch soon about what comes next.” The incoming administration is already open for business on the Web at Change.gov, a digital gateway for the transition.
The Bush campaign arrived at the White House with a conviction that it would continue a conservative revolution with the help of Karl Rove’s voter lists, phone banks and direct mail. But those tools were crude and expensive compared with what the Obama camp is bringing to the Oval Office.
“I think it is very significant that he was the first post-boomer candidate for president,” Mr. Andreessen said. “Other politicians I have met with are always impressed by the Web and surprised by what it could do, but their interest sort of ended in how much money you could raise. He was the first politician I dealt with who understood that the technology was a given and that it could be used in new ways.”
The juxtaposition of a networked, open-source campaign and a historically imperial office will have profound implications and raise significant questions. Special-interest groups and lobbyists will now contend with an environment of transparency and a president who owes them nothing. The news media will now contend with an administration that can take its case directly to its base without even booking time on the networks.
More profoundly, while many people think that President-elect Obama is a gift to the Democratic Party, he could actually hasten its demise. Political parties supply brand, ground troops, money and relationships, all things that Mr. Obama already owns.
And his relationships are not the just traditional ties of Democrats — teachers’ unions, party faithful and Hollywood moneybags — but a network of supporters who used a distributed model of phone banking to organize and get out the vote, helped raise a record-breaking $600 million, and created all manner of media clips that were viewed millions of times. It was an online movement that begot offline behavior, including producing youth voter turnout that may have supplied the margin of victory.
“Thomas Jefferson used newspapers to win the presidency, F.D.R. used radio to change the way he governed, J.F.K. was the first president to understand television, and Howard Dean saw the value of the Web for raising money,” said Ranjit Mathoda, a lawyer and money manager who blogs at Mathoda.com. “But Senator Barack Obama understood that you could use the Web to lower the cost of building a political brand, create a sense of connection and engagement, and dispense with the command and control method of governing to allow people to self-organize to do the work.”
All of the Obama supporters who traded their personal information for a ticket to a rally or an e-mail alert about the vice presidential choice, or opted in on Facebook or MyBarackObama can now be mass e-mailed at a cost of close to zero. And instead of the constant polling that has been a motor of presidential governance, an Obama White House can use the Web to measure voter attitudes.
“When you think about it, a campaign is a start-up business,” Mr. Mathoda said. “Other than his speech in 2004 at the convention and his two books, Mr. Obama had very little in terms of brand to begin with, and he was up against Senator Clinton, who had all the traditional sources of power, and then Senator McCain. But he had the right people and the right idea to take them on. When you think about it, it was like he was going up against Google and Yahoo. And he won.”
There is tremendous power in opening citizen access to government — think of how much good will and support Mayor Michael Bloomberg garnered by coming up with 311, a one-stop phone number for New Yorkers who had a problem.
But now Senator Obama’s 20-month conversation with the electorate enters a new phase. There is sense of ownership, a kind of possessive entitlement, on the part of the people who worked to elect him. The shorthand for his organizing Web site, “MyBO,” says it all.
“People will continue to expect a conversation, a two-way relationship that is a give and take,” said Thomas Gensemer, managing partner of Blue State Digital, which helped conceive and put into effect Obama’s digital outreach. “People who were part of the campaign will opt in to political or governing tracks and those relationships will continue in some form.”
The founders of America wanted a government that reflected its citizens, but would be at remove from the baser impulses of the mob. The mob, flush with victory, is at hand, but instead of pitchforks and lanterns, they have broadband and YouTube. Like every other presidency, the Obama administration will have its battles with the media, but that may seem like patty-cake if it runs afoul of the self-publishing, self-organizing democracy it helped create — say, by delaying health care legislation or breaking a promise on taxes.
That’s the thing about pipes today: they run both ways.
“It’s clear there has been a dramatic shift,” said Andrew Rasiej, the founder of the Personal Democracy Forum, an annual conference about the intersection of politics and technology. “Any politician who fails to recognize that we are in a post-party era with a new political ecology in which connecting like minds and forming a movement is so much easier will not be around long.
“Yes, we have met Big Brother, the one who is always watching. And Big Brother is us.”
White House 2.0
MyBo alias My.BarackObama.com est THE centre névralgique de la campagne de Barack Hussein Obama.
Alors que les républicains et autres démocrates comme Hillary Clinton en étaient restés aux modèles de campagnes purement télévisuels à la sauce Foxnews et autres TF1 (not' président ne doit plus savoir à quel saint se vouer, si ce n'est en se planquant derrière une quelconque Johnny'Adopi loi de restriction numérique) , Obama misait sur internet en intégrant dans son équipe Chris Hugues, l'un des fondateurs de facebook. Il n'y a qu'a lire cette analyse comparative , purement technique, des sites d'Obama et McCain pour voir le fossé technologique qui sépare ces deux générations de politiciens en terme de réseaux sociaux.
Tandis que les vieux cons de la politique ( not'président inclus, avec son style "je-viens-de-sauver-la-planète-financière-à-vos-frais-en-organisant-l'agenda-des-Gtrucs-rien-que-pour-faire-chier-localement-mes socialos ") usaient et abusaient des vieilles ficelles Tv à la sauce PPDA&O'Reilly , Obama manipulait admirablement, et la Tv et ses vieux cons, et Internet et ses réseaux sociaux.
Usant admirablement des vieux médias et d'internet, Obama a appliqué la politique des cercles concentriques, parvenant jusqu'à se faire admettre comme le candidat idéal, non seulement localement, mais carrément au niveau mondial ( à part Medvedev, de toute façon même si le futur potus avait été un pur wasp c'eût été du pareil au même pour lui, et je le comprends, vu le bordel dans le caucase) : THE METIS. A tel point, par exemple, que la communauté juive états-unienne a voté à 77% pour lui, conformément à leur vote traditionnel.
Alors qu'en 2000 et 2004 Bush remportait les élections grâce au financement du quart du 1% des plus riches de son pays et de ses médias traditionnels, ce métis sorti de nulle part avec ses prénoms "bizarres" et la puissance d'internet devient l'homme le plus puissant de la planète.
Même si cet abruti de Bush a rappelé at home The 3rd Infantry Division’s 1st Brigade Combat Team d'Irak, on ne sait pour quelle raison ... hum..., il y quelque raison d'espérer en l'avenir.
Pour 2012, les républicains ont paraît-il une bête de course d'origine hispanique compatible 2.0 ...
McCain, son conseiller et la Géorgie
Quand un conseiller en politique étrangère de McCain conseille aussi le président géorgien pour ... 200 000$.
Il faudrait vérifier que ce brave homme ne siège pas aussi au conseil d'administration d'une boite d'armement.
Il faut dire qu'entre McCain et les lobbyists, c'est une histoire d'amour.
Washington Post 13 aout 2008
By Matthew Mosk and Jeffrey H. Birnbaum
Sen. John McCain's top foreign policy adviser prepped his boss for an April 17 phone call with the president of Georgia and then helped the presumptive Republican presidential nominee prepare a strong statement of support for the fledgling republic.
The day of the call, a lobbying firm partly owned by the adviser, Randy Scheunemann, signed a $200,000 contract to continue providing strategic advice to the Georgian government in Washington.
ad_icon
The McCain campaign said Georgia's lobbying contract with Orion Strategies had no bearing on the candidate's decision to speak with President Mikheil Saakashvili and did not influence his statement. "The Embassy of Georgia requested the call," said campaign spokesman Brian Rogers.
But ethics experts have raised concerns about former lobbyists for foreign governments providing advice to presidential candidates about those same countries. "The question is, who is the client? Is the adviser loyal to income from a foreign client, or is he loyal to the candidate he is working for now?" said James Thurber, a lobbying expert at American University. "It's dangerous if you're getting advice from people who are very close to countries on one side or another of a conflict."
At the time of McCain's call, Scheunemann had formally ceased his own lobbying work for Georgia, according to federal disclosure reports. But he was still part of Orion Strategies, which had only two lobbyists, himself and Mike Mitchell.
Scheunemann remained with the firm for another month, until May 15, when the McCain campaign imposed a tough new anti-lobbyist policy and he was required to separate himself from the company.
Rogers said Scheunemann "receives no compensation of any type from Orion Strategies and has not since May 15, 2008." Scheunemann declined to be interviewed for this story.
As a private lobbyist trying to influence lawmakers and Bush administration staffers, Scheunemann at times relied on his access to McCain in his work for foreign clients on Capitol Hill. He and his partner reported 71 phone conversations and meetings with McCain and his top advisers since 2004 on behalf of foreign clients, including Georgia, according to forms they filed with the Justice Department.
The contacts often focused on Georgia's aspirations to join NATO and on legislative proposals, including a measure co-sponsored by McCain that supported Georgia's position on South Ossetia, one of the Georgian regions taken over by Russia this weekend.
Another measure lobbied by Orion and co-sponsored by McCain, the NATO Freedom Consolidation Act of 2006, would have authorized a $10 million grant for Georgia.
For months while McCain's presidential campaign was gearing up, Scheunemann held dual roles, advising the candidate on foreign policy while working as Georgia's lobbyist. Between Jan. 1, 2007, and May 15, 2008, the campaign paid Scheunemann nearly $70,000 to provide foreign policy advice. During the same period, the government of Georgia paid his firm $290,000 in lobbying fees.
Since 2004, Orion has collected $800,000 from the government of Georgia.
Rogers said Orion's representation of Georgia had no bearing on McCain's decision to speak with Saakashvili in April. "The Embassy of Georgia requested the call because of Georgian concerns over recent Russian actions dealing with South Ossetia and Abkhazia," he said.
McCain has said that he has worked closely with Georgia and its top officials since the mid-1990s. On the campaign trail yesterday, McCain referred to Saakashvili as a close friend.
But Rogers acknowledged that "Scheunemann and others on the foreign policy staff are involved in call requests and statements on foreign policy issues."
After the April call, McCain issued a statement that day voicing support for Georgia's position.
"We must not allow Russia to believe it has a free hand to engage in policies that undermine Georgian sovereignty," McCain said in the statement. "Georgia has acted with restraint in its response and should continue to do so."
Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, said it may be impossible to know whether Scheunemann's advice to McCain was truly unvarnished.
"The question is, whose views are you really espousing?" Sloan said. "Are they really your own views, or are they the views that are bought and paid for by the clients of your top aides? McCain probably would be sympathetic to Georgia regardless, but having a guy like Scheunemann as a top aide raises questions."
Hari Sevugan, a spokesman for the Democratic candidate, Sen. Barack Obama, said Scheunemann's business ties to Georgia raise questions about how much he influenced McCain's position on the Georgia conflict.
"It's these sorts of appearances of a conflict of interest that are a natural consequence of having a campaign run by lobbyists, staffed by lobbyists and being ensconced in a lobbyist culture for over a quarter of a century," Sevugan said.
Research editor Alice Crites contributed to this report.
Obama et le proche-orient
Depuis le 11 sept 2001, les premiers visés par le patriot act sont les arabes états-uniens. Ils subissent également un racisme des plus virulents. Un soutien de Giuliani, Deady a réclamé tout simplement un génocide des musulmans sans que cela n'émeuve qui que ce soit aux usa, les actes de violences et les arrestations arbitraires à leur égard ayant été croissant.
Concernant cette violence à l'égard des arabes états-uniens, Obama a déclaré il y a quelques années que toute forme de violence à l'égard d'un musulman états-uniens est un acte de violence à l'égard de tous les états-uniens. C'est le genre de propos qu'un criminel de guerre raciste comme Cheney aurait pu tenir, mais de la part d'Obama, j'ai plutôt tendance à le croire. S'il est élu, vu son parcours, il agira pour faire baisser cette violence. Même s'il a voté pour la ré-autorisation du patriot act en 2006 et pour la construction du mur avec le Mexique.
Les motivations des arabo-états-uniens sont les mêmes que ceux des défenseurs des droits civiques comme l'aclu par exemple qui dénonce régulièrement les violences commises à leur égard.
Maintenant concernant sa politique vis à vis du p-o, elle a évolué d'une position équilibrée vers un franc soutien à Israél, comme le montre cet article de Ali Abunimah dans "the electronic intifada".
A. Abunimah décrit cette évolution depuis leur première rencontre il y a dix ans à aujourd'hui. La première fois, son impression était plus que positive, I distinctly remember thinking 'if only a man of this calibre could become president one day.'
Ensuite en 2000:
Over the years since I first saw Obama speak I met him about half a dozen times, often at Palestinian and Arab-American community events in Chicago including a May 1998 community fundraiser at which Edward Said was the keynote speaker. In 2000, when Obama unsuccessfully ran for Congress I heard him speak at a campaign fundraiser hosted by a University of Chicago professor. On that occasion and others Obama was forthright in his criticism of US policy and his call for an even-handed approach to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
Aujourd'hui Abunimah est décu et il montre, citation d'Obama à l'appui, cette évolution. Il estime, néanmoins, qu'Obama fait tout simplement ce qu'il faut pour être élu, malgré ses anciennes bonnes relations avec les états-uniens d'origine palestinienne.
If disappointing, given his historically close relations to Palestinian-Americans, Obama's about-face is not surprising. He is merely doing what he thinks is necessary to get elected and he will continue doing it as long as it keeps him in power.
Voici ce que disait de lui Shmuel Rosner dans Haaretz, après son discours devant l'aipac en mars 2007. Reviewing the speech, Ha'aretz Washington correspondent Shmuel Rosner concluded that Obama "sounded as strong as Clinton, as supportive as Bush, as friendly as Giuliani. At least rhetorically, Obama passed any test anyone might have wanted him to pass. So, he is pro-Israel. Period."
Obama a repris à son compte les mensonges pratiqués par les partisans d'une ligne dure vis à vis des palestiniens et des libanais.
While constantly emphasizing his concern about the threat Israelis face from Palestinians, Obama said nothing about the exponentially more lethal threat Israelis present to Palestinians.
.../...
Six months later, Obama said, "Hizbullah launched four thousand rocket attacks just like the one that destroyed the home in Kiryat Shmona, and kidnapped Israeli service members."
Obama's phrasing suggests that Hizbullah launched thousands of rockets in an unprovoked attack, but it's a complete distortion. Throughout his speech he showed a worrying propensity to present discredited propaganda as fact. As anyone who checks the chronology of last summer's Lebanon war will easily discover, Hizbullah only launched lethal barrages of rockets against Israeli towns and cities after Israel had heavily bombed civilian neighborhoods in Lebanon killing hundreds of civilians, many fleeing the Israeli onslaught.
En conclusion Abunimah estime que ce qu'il manque aux arabes états-uniens, ce sont des réseaux capables de drainer des dons vers les candidats. C'est donc l'argent qu'il leur manque pour traduire en actes leurs revendications.
Obama has also been close to some prominent Arab Americans, and has received their best advice. His decisive trajectory reinforces a lesson that politically weak constituencies have learned many times: access to people with power alone does not translate into influence over policy. Money and votes, but especially money, channelled through sophisticated and coordinated networks that can "bundle" small donations into million dollar chunks are what buy influence on policy.
Elections US : l'âge du capitaine
Deux sondages ce week end, l'un de Newsweek, l'autre du Washingtonpost donnent une avance plus que confortable à Obama.
Selon Newsweek, Obama est 15 points devant McCain avec respectivement 51% et 36%, alors qu'au mois de mai, ils étaient à égalité avec 46% des intentions de vote.
Selon le Post, l'age de McCain (73ans) pose problème à plus d'un tiers des électeurs, tandis que dans un sondage en mai dans le même journal indiquait que l'Afro-américanité d'Obama ne posait pas problème à plus de 90% des personnes interrogées. En tenant compte d'un éventuel effet Bradley, ce dernier chiffre est plus que confortable pour Obama.
Même si le vote d'un afro-américain est une fantastique avancée pour la société états-unienne, il n'est pas sur que cela change grand chose dans la politique étrangère de l'Empire.
En effet, même si Obama s'est très courageseument positionné contre la guerre en Irak (contre l'ensemble de la classe politique états-unienne), il s'est franchement déculotté devant l'Aipac comme nous le verrons dans un prochain post.
Inscription à :
Articles (Atom)
