HATE TO SAY IT! - HILLARY CLINTON IS RIGHT!

In the following article " The Explanation Hillary Clinton Owes ", published by Richard Cohen in the Washington Post the author uses a very clever rationale to question Mrs. Clinton position on the Iraq war.

I am not a supporter of Mrs. Clinton and I do not know who I will vote for in 2008. I do know though, that I will definitely not vote for her if she makes the claim that her vote on the Iraq war was a mistake.

With his question Mr. Cohen is playing a game of catch 22 because a senator that acknowledges that his/her vote was a mistake and ends up being President will have to live up to his /her words in the likely eventuality that compensation and/or human rights lawsuits are brought up against the US in international courts.

Acknowledging that you were wrong when you voted for the war amounts to saying you did something you were not supposed to do and therefore you agree that the US should be liable for that mistake.

That would be absolutely irresponsible (shame on you John Edwards) and, in my book, it automatically disqualifies you for the position of President of the United States.

A NEW FOREIGN POLICY FOR LATIN AMERICA

It has been a while since I had the chance to read an article on Latin America that advocates the need for a new foreign policy in the region. It has certainly been extremely long since I have read an article that offers fresh and viable alternatives to the outdated and strategically moronic Cuban centric policy we have today.

The time has come though and I am delighted to encourage you to follow the link ahead and read this very insightful article; “The Good Neighbor Strategy” by Moises Naim published in the July 17, 2006 issue of Time Magazine.

Mr. Moises Naim is Editor in Chief of Foreign Policy Magazine which I find to be a most interesting publication and therefore I am including a link to the magazine in this blog as well.

TEAM USA; WHAT A RUSH!

I went to Germany with the excitement and the jitters of not knowing what to expect from the US soccer team. I must say though that I was full of anticipation, eager to watch them play and, as in the past, did not expected to see many American fans in the stadiums.

I come back though, absolutely thrilled with the performance of Team USA and, further, amazed at the number of American fans that cheered our team in every game.

Yes, we did not classify and we certainly did not play well against Ukraine and Ghana but, that really matters very little after watching Team USA play Italy.

Contrary to common believe, soccer is not an easy game. It is not enough to know how to play, have good players, know the rules and follow a well rehearsed game plan. To be a great team you need something that runs much deeper and that can’t be bought. Something each national team has to create by themselves; something that eventually becomes a permanent feature and the fabric itself of soccer history and tradition. That magic is called personality and it is what makes a team unique.

Every great team has it and diehard soccer fans can tell which national team they are watching just by the way they play. At the end of the day, soccer is all about personality.

For years I have been watching Team USA play and though it was clear that they could play the game, they were lacking that magic ingredient that gives a national team a unique personality.

Team USA had shown some sparks of personality in the 2002 World Cup but it wasn’t until the game with Italy in Germany this year that everything came together and for the first time we could see the birth of a new soccer style and personality that from now on will make Team USA absolutely unique.

A team with a beautiful personality that was certainly a pleasure to watch unfold. A personality made up of a little country, a little salsa and a little blues. A personality brought out by the passion and talent of a great player called Landon Donovan.

I can’t wait to watch Team USA play in the next world cup!

THE CHAVEZ SAGA II - "leftside"

The Chavez saga continues. I am herewith including additional excerpts of comments in this regard written by bloggers who visit the interesting Miami Herald blog of Andres Oppenheimer (link in this page).

leftside said:

Mousqueton: I don't quite get ya. You quote a wonderful T. Roosevelt paragraph about the need to get rid of our country's divisions but justify the "biggest house" in the barrio being able to control the others.

You urge Americans to "understand socialism as a civilized political alternative for many of our neighbors," but treat Chavez as the antichrist.

I have to ask which specific Chavez position do you disagree with? Beyond style, what exactly has he done that you thought was a mortal sin, worthy of "rubbing" our friends like Chile and Ecuador with some of our heaviest sandpaper possible?

You, like even the LA Times, seem to take for granted that Chavez is an enemy of democracy. But Chavez's real enemy is clear = neo-liberalism and capitalism. His democratic credentials are actually stellar in many ways (today's Venezuelans rate their democracy highest in Latin America). He's been elected more, by higher margins than about anyone. Participation is through the roof and the press and NGOs are as developed and oppositional (and free) as anywhere. And local participatory democracy is blossoming.

Is it just young idealism to want to eradicate illiteracy from your country (like Venezuela and now Bolivia)? Is it just irresponsible to want to earn the maximum value on your country's natural resources?

mousqueton said:

Off course you don’t get me!

THE CHAVEZ SAGA I - "leftside"

The Chavez saga in Venezuela is becoming more and more interesting. I am herewith including excerpts of some comments in this regard written by bloggers who visit the interesting Miami Herald blog of Andres Oppenheimer (link in this page).

By the way, we need to get those arrogant Washington idiots out of office and bring in people that think and are capable of designing a sensible, realistic and intelligent Latin American foreign policy. Enjoy!
leftside said:

It's laughable to hear some of you rant about the irrelevancy and anti-US bias of the OAS. It shows your contempt for democracy and regional diplomacy. The OAS' history as a US dominated institution is not debatable.

Because the region preferred a moderate Chilean over a Washington stooge is no reason to "cut them dead”. That type of bullying will get the US nowhere even faster.

Mora, you're proposal to boycott the OAS until they replace its leadership to suit your radical Cuban friends is revealing. And your shock at the "back scratching" that goes on in international foray is hypocritical and naive. Or are you unaware of the much more crude arm-twisting the US utilizes behind doors?