Too Popular Abroad?

Daniel Larison thinks that the argument that Obama could appeal to developing countries’ populations and transform American soft power will only hurt Obama at home:

You could not have concocted a more insidious anti-Obama campaign than what many of his supporters (as well as the candidate and campaign) have managed to do in constantly talking up all the foreign places he lived, his relatives in Kenya, and on and on.  From a certain perspective, Obama’s background and biography must seem to be undeniable political assets, but slowly it is beginning to dawn on his boosters that a great many, probably most, Americans do not share that perspective.  Furthermore, the emphasis on Obama’s background and biography has always meant that the ‘08 election would become a culture clash, and it is one that I suspect the Democrats still cannot win.

I find this too depressing and defeatist an attitude. If Obama’s biography and appeal affect global opinion and therefore foreign policy, the subject should be on the table – as a weapon in pursuit of national self-interest. If we cannot have a debate in a democracy about this impact without fostering xenophobia, ignorance and fear, then democracy cannot work. Which, I suspect, is partly Larison’s point. I’m not as defeatist – and it’s telling that many criticisms of Obama – Carole Simpson’s for example – fall into this trap.

Oil Futures

With oil at $126 a barrel, Henry Blodget considers our options:

Time to drill in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge? No. Time to cut us gas-subsidy checks? No. Time to work on a tax and consumption policy that encourages less oil usage and more investment in alternative, renewable energy.

Well: duh. With public transportation booming, there is a silver lining in higher oil prices.

Can The Internet Write A Book?

Yes, but not a very good one. Here’s the opening paragraph from Penguin’s wiki book experiment:

The deep waters, black as ink, began to swell and recede into an uncertain distance. A gray ominous mist obscured the horizon. The ocean expanse seemed to darken in disapproval. Crashing tides sounded groans of agonized discontent. The ocean pulsed with a frightening, vital force. Although hard to imagine, life existed beneath. It’s infinite underbelly was teeming with life, a monstrous collection of finned, tentacled, toxic, and slimy parts. Below its surface lay the wreckage of countless souls. But we had dared to journey across it. Some had even been brave enough to explore its sable velveteen depths, and have yet to come up for precious air…."

The Obama Revolution

Matt Stoller examines the organizational overhaul the Obama campaign promises for the Democrats. Yes: it’s extremely ambitious. Money quote from an Edwards supporter:

In a strange sort of way, this is rather inspiring. I mean, in almost no time, the guy has managed to consolidate power totally. At the same time, he’s done this in a fashion much different from traditional dictators, or even powerful political figures like Clinton; rather than taking the reigns and giving himself the power and closing the windows so no one can see what he’s doing, he’s opening up the windows more, and simply giving power to those who share his ideology. Yes, this is what Clinton did (empowering the DLC), but he empowered them around himself and neutered any major figures who could oppose them, while Obama is actually training them. I wish he would allow for partisans like us to be in the group, but it is still an interesting thing to watch.

Don’t Tell Lou Dobbs

Thomas P.M. Barnett summarizes Suzanne Barlyn’s article on outsourcing legal work to India:

We’re looking at 29k legal jobs shipped abroad by the end of 2008 and maybe 80k by 2015. India is simply moving up the service ladder, just like China does on the manufacturing ladder. You go from call centers (lower-value business process outsourcing) to knowledge process outsourcing (KPO). Engineering and medicine comes under assault too, as these KPOs act more and more like "branch offices of U.S. companies."

India’s advantages are clear: English speakers and a common law background.

Dissents Of The Day

Ce5c9202fa08350f_m

Dan Savage, writing from the Starbucks capital of the world, attacks the petite scone I’ve praised so lavishly:

I like petite vanilla pastries just as much as the next effete urban elitist. And I’ve tried these “scones” from Starbucks—in South Carolina, in Chicago, and in Seattle (at the airport). And those petite vanilla scones utterly flavorless, the icing is chalky, and the edges are neither crispy nor crusty. They taste like lightly sweetened Play-Doh. They are wholly without merit.

A reader adds:

You’re crazy.  Nothing is better than the Starbucks toffee almond bar.  I dislike coffee and would never have a reason to ever go into a Starbucks if it wasn’t for the toffee almond.  To even suggest that something like a petite scone could compete with it is heresy.

I’m grateful for Dan for providing a Proustian edge to my petite scone fetish. Play-Doh! Mmmmm.

Your Keyboard And A Toilet

I had a feeling this was true:

A consumer advocacy group commissioned the tests in which British microbiologist James Francis took a swab to 33 keyboards, a toilet seat and a toilet door handle at the publication’s London office in January.

Francis then tested the swabs to see what nasty germs he managed to pick up. He found that four of the keyboards tested were potential health hazards — and one had levels of germs five times higher than that found on the toilet seat.

Now we know why Mickey blogs so infrequently.