The Teachable Moment - Obama's Olympic Lesson

It is admirable that Obama went all in to bring in 2016 Olympics to his home town. Not sure if he knew the risks and still went for the pitch OR if he thought US has the games in the kitty. It is honorable either way, the former scenario would bring in more points for his love for Chicago. The time and money would have been more than worth if he had come back with a win. It would bring in a few billions into the country and a lot more cheer to the nation now and in 2016. It would have provided the country a great opportunity for America to engage with world culturally. It is a no loss scenario, as opposed to what some Republicans say to score some political points. 

But, it is indeed a teachable moment for the Obama when dealing with international community. His team was highly confident about their pitch, their strategies and goodwill of US in a new changed world led by Obama.

“There won’t be a dry eye in the room,” said Valerie Jarrett, “I’m sure that it will touch the hearts of each of the IOC members,” before heading out to Copenhagen about the dramatic speech that Michelle Obama is going to give to the IOC. Michelle Obama her self was all in for the pitch. "It's a battle. We're going to win," she apparently boasted, with good humor. "Take no prisoners." Though Obama's speech was decent and professional compared to Mrs. Obama's self referencing political campaign style 'personal story' speech, (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/02/president-obama-michelle_n_307637.html) it doesn't matter. 

In fact, majority of the votes would have been decided much earlier. It is not enough to put a nice effort pitching a plan and putting a nice face. There are a number of geo political and economic factors that would decide the votes in an international body. If US managed to come last contesting for a sports event with not much at stake, even after taking a number of steps to please international community as a part of an image make over and even after the most powerful man on Earth making the pitch himself. Imagine what lies ahead when you need to win over the UN body in more serious and consequential situations. 

Obama's team seems to have similar confidence in their strategies and the goodwill Obama has created in the world when it comes to foreign policy.  It is fine that Obama is trying a new inclusive politics to bring every country in the world together as equals (?). But the IOC has given him enough indications that the world doesn't work his way. 

Obama - 21st century Nehru?

Closing Guantanamo Bay.
Releasing Torture Memos and potentially trying the people who approved them.
Banning secret CIA prisons.
Allowing travel and remittances to Cuba.
Appeasing Muslim Nations.
Talking to Anti American communist regimes.
Proposing to back off of Missile Shield plans in eastern europe to trade for Russian help talking to Iran.
Ignoring Israel Lobby.
Accepting American responsibility for anti americanism across the world and almost openly disowning 50 years of American foreign policy.

These are the things that you would expect to hear from liberals on the streets of SF and Berkeley. Or hollywood and media personalities.

Talking morals is one thing and acting on them as a President is another. It feels like Obama strongly believes that American policies are responsible for the current state of the world. He seems to believe from the heart that world can be ONE and we can all be friends. It's almost unreal.

I am not sure if the world can be one. But it is probably worth trying. But it sure takes more than 8 years Obama potentially has and lot more grit and determination to continue these policies. Every country has it's own priorities and politics and will not turn the page because America wants to. I hope Obama has at least an 8 year plan and the political will to continue even in the case of major crises.

PS: Nehru apparently believed in such ideals, trusted UN and considered Chinese his brothers, ended up conceding half of Kashmir to Pakistan and China, allowed chinese to occupy tibet.

Desi CIO and CTO for Obama's Administration!!

Do not know if these appointments has any significance at all for India, but it is interesting nonetheless to have two Indian descent people in key roles in Technology!

Aneesh Paul Chopra - CTO
Chopra serves as Virginia’s Secretary of Technology. He leads the Commonwealth’s strategy to effectively leverage technology in government reform, to promote Virginia’s innovation agenda, and to foster technology-related economic development. Previously, he worked as Managing Director with the Advisory Board Company, leading the firm’s Financial Leadership Council and the Working Council for Health Plan Executives.

Vivek Kundra, Federal Chief Information Officer
Vivek Kundra formerly served in Mayor Fenty's cabinet as the Chief Technology Officer (CTO) for the District of Columbia, responsible for technology operations and strategy for 86 agencies. He has been recognized among the top 25 CTO's in the country and as the 2008 IT Executive of the Year for his pioneering work to drive transparency, engage citizens and lower the cost of government operations. Kundra is also recognized for his leadership in public safety communications, cyber security and IT portfolio management. Before Kundra came to the District, Governor Timothy M. Kaine appointed him Assistant Secretary of Commerce and Technology for the Commonwealth of Virginia, the first dual cabinet role in the state's history. Kundra's diverse record also includes technology and public policy experience in private industry and academia. He is a graduate of the University of Virginia's Sorensen Institute for Political Leadership and holds a MS in Information Technology from the University of Maryland.

High Speed Show Off???

Obama unveils a 'Strategic Plan' for the high speed rail future in US. Fantastic.

"Imagine whisking through towns at speeds over 100 miles an hour, walking only a few steps to public transportation, and ending up just blocks from your destination. Imagine what a great project that would be to rebuild America."

When you hear Obama saying these lines, you sure would be excited as hell and start dreaming about the day you step on to one of these trains in San Francisco Transbay Terminal. So I was all excited about the plan and digged in a bit to check the dates when I can start riding in one of those machines. There is nothing!!! The plan boasts of $8 Billion allocated to project in the Stimulus. What a joke!!

Just the line from 'SF to LA' has been in plans for ages and state is struggling to find the $40 Billion it costs according to the current estimates. Just one line from SF to LA. The plan doesn't even mention the total cost of this vision, forget about how they plan to raise the money. Check out the strategic plan here - http://www.fra.dot.gov/us/content/31

This takes me back to one of the line that got me excited from his 'Not State of the Union' speech, that they already identified $2 Trillion in spending cuts. Which turned out to be nothing more than the savings for not continuing the 'Surge' in Iraq.

I still like a lot of things that he is saying in his speeches, at the face value, but am afraid to dig in, for it may just be another farce.

Right problems - Wrong solutions (Education)

In his 'Not State of Union' speech Obama recognized some important problems that needs to be addressed for long run health of the economy.
Health Care, Education and Energy. I'd add social security and defense spending to that.
I was impressed. But once his solutions are being laid out it is not good.

Education
California has the highest state taxes in the country and it spent 31% and 10.3% on K-12 and higher education respectively in 2008-2009. (20.4% and 8.6% in 1992-1993)
I have no big problem with spending on higher education. US has the best of the schools in the world. It is an merit based open system. Any one can study anywhere as long as they can get an admit.
But K-12. Spending 31% of all state tax revenues on state run education system is unacceptable. This is not all that is spent on education, local and federal governments also spend money on k-12 education.

What is the problem with the state run education? too many to list.
low paid teachers
no competition and no incentives for the brightest minds to be in the teaching...
choice of schools
you can only go to the school in your community. no regard for choice. homogeneous class rooms. artificial inflation of real estate in communities with good schools.
no child left behind
...
...

Pouring more money into the failed education system would not lead to more quality or quantity, it just goes down the drain. giving computers to the schools wouldn't help if they don't have competent teachers. competent teachers would be possible only with competitve incentive based market. Most of my friends never knew how to use computers until they got admitted to engineering schools, but now they are doing cutting edge work in computer science because they all came from a very competitive education system and knew all the basic mathematics and sciences.

It's so easy to see anywhere in the world and I am stunned how the US is turning a blind eye to the facts. Govt. involvment should be in oversight, not in management.

http://www.ebudget.ca.gov/pdf/BudgetSummary/SummaryCharts.pdf
http://www.caltax.org/RESEARCH/spending96/spend96.htm

Selective Ignorance

When Hillary uses generic phrases like 'fired up! ready to go', Everyone unanimously shouts that she picked up the line from Obama. She is not even allowed to say she is for 'Change', for 'Change' is owned by Obama.

Now it turns out that the speeches of Obama are taken in form and content, from Mass Gov. Deval Patrick 's election speeches in more than one instance and were never credited publicly until caught. More over, Obama dismisses it as a non issue. No one in the Media points a finger. Sure, they discuss. They discuss on how Clinton is trying to attack Obama.

I am surprised! In a country where copying and plagiarizing without credit is considered very menial in a very over the top way, Obama escapes unscathed.

Change we are looking for!

Clinton Attacks... Obama Targets!!!

The way Media works -

When Clinton says something about Obama or his policies.. Headlines scream 'Clinton Attacks Obama...'
When the reverse happens... they softly read 'Obama Targets Clinton...'

Can we call it bias??