Obama Gets A Free Pen?

Ryan Sager’s reading:

The explanation that makes more sense to me is that it’s something closer to the old salesman’s free-pen trick on a grand scale. A free pen from, say, a pharmaceutical rep to a doctor seems harmless enough. But it triggers a strong reaction in people: reciprocity. You scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours. Social science experiments have consistently shown that giving people thing – even tiny little trinkets – can make them reciprocate in substantial ways. There’s a reason this free-pen trick exists, and that’s because it works.

President Obama has just received the biggest free pen in the world. I’m not sure what happens to the substantial cash attached to the award, but the prestige is a big free pen in itself. And the intent seems clear enough to me. We, the international community, have bestowed our highest honor upon you. Now, you feel at least a little more inclined to lean in our direction on: global warming, Israel-Palestine, etc.

David Frum has related thoughts. Kevin Sullivan counters. 

Our Women In Uniform

It has long been true that lesbians have suffered disproportionally under DADT. This last year was no exception:

In fiscal year 2008, the Air Force dismissed 56 women and 34 men. In addition, the Army removed more women under the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy at a greater rate than men when compared with the ratio of women to men in each service. Of those discharged under the policy, 36 percent were women, although women make up only 14 percent of troops in the Army, the data showed.

Off The Cuff, Ctd

A reader writes:

Fallows is largely on the mark here, though he moves too quickly through the latter half of the speech.  Speaking of Iraq and Afghanistan, Obama said: "I am the Commander-in-Chief of a country that's responsible for ending a war and working in another theater to confront a ruthless adversary that directly threatens the American people and our allies."  In the middle of this sentence, he drifts off slightly, seems to lose focus, and then quickly reconnects.  It's a brief moment, but a telling one. The immediate impact of this award will be to frame his decision to commit troops in the Afghan theater or to draw down our forces there.  I don't think the Nobel committee is so crass as to attempt to influence that specific policy decision.  At the same time, Obama must certainly be considering the implications of his status as a freshly-minted Nobel laureate on that looming choice.

A Thousand Little Frauds

Martine van Bijlert documents vote manipulation at the local level in Afghanistan:

The competition was more localized and the level of organization of the fraud more limited than in the presidential election, but the margins needed to win were also much smaller. Many unsuccessful candidates without money or access to the electoral apparatus have travelled to Kabul to register their complaints or to lobby their cases. The list of allegations is by now familiar: various forms of ballot stuffing on polling day, manipulation of the local count, tampering with result sheets, and manipulation during data entry and tallying.

Well Wisdom

Joe Klein writes:

A few weeks ago, a well-known U.S. military expert gave a wise speech about the near impossibility of making a counterinsurgency (COIN) strategy work in Afghanistan. He gave two examples. The first was digging a well: "How could you do anything wrong by digging a well to give people clean water?" Well, you could create new enemies by where you dug the well and who controlled it. You could lose a village by trying to help it. And then there was the matter of what he called COIN mathematics. If there are 10 Taliban and you kill two, how many do you have left? Eight, perhaps. Or there might be two, because six of the remaining eight decide it's just not worth fighting anymore. Or you might have 20 because the brothers and cousins of the two dead fighters decide to take vengeance. "When I am asked what approach we should take in Afghanistan," General Stanley McChrystal concluded, "I say humility."

Yglesias Award Nominee

“If the Obama administration wants to make a statement and impress upon the world their fundamental rejection of the forces of bigotry and homophobia, how about sending a gay ambassador to Pakistan or Saudi Arabia? And now that the president has cleared the way for the same-sex partners of our foreign service officers to participate in programs available to spouses, how about sending him with his partner? That would be impressive, and would likely be as warmly received by Republicans as by Democrats,” – Michael Goldfarb.

Reagan appointed a black ambassador to apartheid South Africa, as Dan Savage noted. Now that was symbolism. But I suspect Goldfarb is a little dewy-eyed about Republicans, especially the base. Condi Rice and Laura Bush might have backed it, but the current leadership – Limbaugh, Levin and Hannity? And Rove?

Peace Prize Reax IV: The Readers

A reader writes:

I’m as much of an Obama supporter as anyone, but until he delivers on some of the things he has promised, he shouldn’t be winning Nobel Prizes.  There has been no follow-up to Cairo.  Guantanamo is still open.  Iran is still trying to get nukes, North Korea still has them.  Afghanistan is in limbo.  Obama is a great big step in the right direction, but lets wait until he delivers before we start to celebrate.

Another writes:

So, it’s a bad thing that the world is so optimistic about America’s role as a world leader with Obama as President that the Nobel Committee gave him the Peace Prize?  Really?  So bad he should turn down the honor?  Really? Have we gotten so cynical in our views that when a segment of the world shows optimism toward our country, we think the best reaction is to double down on our cynicism?

Another:

So now the far right is angry that Obama got the peace prize. No surprise, everything makes them angry, but this one is especially hysterical. How is it possible that American citizens can not take pride in the idea that an elected sitting President has received one of the world’s highest honors? So allow me to pose a question they have asked many times: Why do you hate America?

Another:

The liberal notion (much bemoaned by Brooks & Will) that we’re all just special on our own without actually doing anything is on full display. Obama deserved much praise for becoming who he is and overcoming obvious personal difficulties and trials.  But that’s about it.  He hasn’t actualized that much in the world other than being a symbol for a lot of (admittedly important) things. I, personally, would be embarrassed by this.  During the campaign Obama told us he was looking forward to the celebrity fluff part of the campaign being over so that people could see what he was really about and get down to business.  Clearly the Euros haven’t gotten the message yet. This is really awkward, and it is a healthy serving of red meat to those who discredit Europe (and more general the UN) with being completely out of touch with reality.

Another:

I’m humored by the commentators saying Obama doesn’t deserve the Peace prize because he hasn’t done anything. That’s precisely the point. And it’s speaks volumes about how much damage Cheney and Bush caused, and for so long, that the rest of the world is giving our leader a prize simply for cutting it out, and doing nothing.

Another:

They nominated him two weeks after he became President.  This award has been given to him on the basis of his campaign and inauguration address.  It is intended in the same spirit as Jimmy Carter’s award was, as a rebuke to George W. Bush.  It’s yet another case of conservatives being damned for their failings, and liberals being praised for their good intentions.

Another:

Remember how Obama should have stepped aside and let Hillary win the primaries? Remember how America wasn’t ready for a black President, of course, so why didn’t he just realize it and wait his turn? Remember last summer when the candidate went to Germany and gave speech before hundreds of thousands of adoring fans?  How arrogant.  Who does he think he is?  Only a president should do that.  He should have at least waited until he won. And then he did win.  And he took a world tour and gave a game changing speech in the Cairo.  Who did he think he was?  A rock star?  The arrogance and audacity–it’s breathtaking. If the man would just wait his turn, dammit.

Another:

I find it really amusing that commentators are proclaiming the Nobel committee’s decision to award Obama the Peace Prize “political.”  Of course it’s political, and it’s political on a global scale, and might arguably matter.  Unlike, for example, the ridiculous decision made by ASU to withhold an honorary degree from the first African-American president because he hadn’t accomplished anything yet.

Another:

You know, this Peace Prize has more potential than people give it credit. Think of it in the long term: it works to paint him into a course of action. Does he want to be the Nobel Peace Prize President who invaded a third country? Who continued two wars beyond all reasonable expectations? Who hides evidence of torture? By handing out this award, they have sent their own message to the President concerning future international relations: live up to the expectations of the Peace Prize.