I'm feeling incredible joy tonight, I'm staggered, and have been celebrating for hours. But I also have journalistic responsibility, and I confess I was a little underwhelmed by Obama's speech. It was too high-flown for me, too regal. At this staggering moment, there was not one confessional statement. John McCain was far more specific and straightforward about the actual news of the night: the first black president. He went on about this. McCain's statement of his own failure was an arresting one. I wish that Obama had been open about his feelings if only for an instant, and frank about the racial news, in the plainspoken personal way that he did in the race speech back in March in Philadelphia. As it was, he used the literary device of that 106-year-old woman to evoke the history-making part of his election. And that was too elusive for me. He obviously believes this is a great achievement not just for the country but for black people in this country, and I wanted a straightforward expression of this feeling, and the natural progression to the next point: that he represents all the people.
I don't think for one second that Obama doesn't understand the job before him, he seemed appropriately humble about that, and I loved when he spoke of "service" and "sacrifice." Those were the most direct words in the speech. There was nothing programmatic about the speech, or specific. JFK used the campaign in '60 to launch the Peace Corps. By contrast, Obama used vague language to describe the aggressive response the U.S. will have to those who want to "tear the world down." (as I remember the line…) Nothing about terrorism. He isn't a risktaker. He only gave that direct and personal race speech in Philly because his back was against the wall. I am somewhat apprehensive about his opacity and carefulness and kingly aura. I wonder how little real sense the public will get of his mental workings, and of his heart. He strikes me as the most private president since Reagan, and maybe as introverted as Nixon.
Still: joy, and ready to get to work!
Obama May Continue Defense Growth, Lifting Lockheed, Northrop
By Gopal Ratnam
Nov. 5 (Bloomberg) — U.S. defense companies, helped by a 70 percent increase in military spending since 2000, may see the trend continue under President-Elect Barack Obama even as the financial crisis squeezes the federal budget.
“He does understand the criticality of an adequate defense budget and importance of strong defense,'' said Marion Blakey, president of the Aerospace Industries Association, a trade group in Arlington, Virginia, that represents companies including Lockheed Martin Corp. and Northrop Grumman Corp.
“There is the acute need to modernize our defense forces, both worn-out equipment that needs to be replaced and ongoing development of technologies,'' Blakey said.
U.S. defense spending rose 72 percent to $671.7 billion for fiscal 2008 from $381.3 billion in 2000, after adjusting for inflation and including spending for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Spending on new weapons during that time increased to 37 percent of the total from 30 percent.
The new Democratic administration faces decisions on $125 billion in major weapons programs, John Young, the Pentagon's chief of acquisitions, told reporters on Oct. 30. They include the purchase of additional Lockheed Martin F-22 fighter jets and Boeing Co.'s C-17 transports; the replacement of Air Force refueling tankers and combat search and rescue helicopters; the acquisition of a new satellite communication system; and a decision on whether to curtail buying the Navy's DDG-1000 Zumwalt class destroyer, jointly built by Northrop Grumman Corp. and General Dynamics Corp., and buy more older DDG-51 type destroyers. Raytheon makes the radar for the DDG-1000.
Security Concerns
In September, President George W. Bush approved a $579 billion defense budget for 2009 that doesn't include the full cost of continuing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Defense company executives including Lockheed Chief Executive Officer Robert Stevens say Obama's national security challenges will be the same as those faced by President Bush but will be complicated by financial pressures that may require closer scrutiny of Pentagon spending.
“When a new president is inaugurated, these circumstances that we are talking about now are not likely to change all that much,'' Stevens said at an investor conference in New York in September. While “some priorities may change,'' he said, “we think we can be sufficiently adaptive to meet those priorities.''
Bethesda, Maryland-based Lockheed is the world's largest defense contractor.
`Perform, Perform, Perform'
As candidates, both Obama and Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona talked about the need to control the cost of defense programs, which could lead to greater use of contracts that set fixed prices for weapons, Northrop CEO Ronald Sugar said on an Oct. 22 conference call. Many development contracts now allow contractors to bill the government for cost increases.
“We do believe that there might be some initial pressure toward changing contracting types,'' Sugar said. “If there's more pressure on fixed-price contracting, I think, speaking for Northrop, we're going to be much more careful in terms of how we would approach that from a risk-management standpoint.''
Obama's campaign Web site said he intends to reduce cost overruns, end no-bid contracting and increase oversight of defense company acquisitions.
Cost increases on five major weapons programs accounted for $206 billion, or 22 percent, of the total $919 billion jump in spending for new arms so far this decade, according to a Pentagon-commissioned report issued last month.
“What we tell our people internally is perform, perform, perform,'' Nicholas Chabraja, chief executive of Falls Church, Virginia-based General Dynamics, said on an Oct. 22 conference call. “Every administration likes programs that are on cost and on schedule.''
Spending Floor
The defense industry wants the next president to set a minimum defense budget pegged to the U.S. economy. Only if the total defense budget grows with the economy can spending on new weapons be assured, said Blakey of the aerospace trade group. It's seeking about $120 billion to $150 billion a year for new weapons in the base defense budget, excluding additional war supplements.
“We advocate 4 percent of the GDP as a floor for defense spending,'' said Blakey, who led the Federal Aviation Administration for President Bush before joining the trade group. “No question that has to be front and center for any new president's agenda.''
The Pentagon also plans to increase the Army's troop strength by 65,000 and the Marine Corps' by 27,000 by 2013, adding to the military budget. Obama supports the troop-strength increase.
Financial Rescue
Defense-budget growth may be further constrained by the $700 billion financial rescue program and the possibility Congress may approve a second stimulus package in addition to the $168 billion plan approved in February.
“The long-term fiscal challenges confronting the United States, linked to rising health-care costs and the aging of the U.S. population, all seem to support the conclusion that the base defense budget is likely to stay relatively flat in real terms,'' not counting war costs, Steve Kosiak, a defense budget analyst at the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, a Washington policy group, wrote in a report last month.
Military spending can act as an economic stimulant during the financial crisis, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in an Oct. 21 interview.
“We are trying to persuade people it would be a good thing'' to increase the projected 2010 defense budget of $526.7 billion by $57 billion, Gates said. “If you want to talk about a stimulus package, the defense budget's not bad and obviously a lot of jobs around the country depend'' on military spending.
To contact the reporter on this story: Gopal Ratnam in Washington at gratnam1@bloomberg.net.
Last Updated: November 4, 2008 23:06 EST
"and maybe as introverted as Nixon"
You would have to go and use the 'N' word. Thanks for ruining a nice evening/morning!
LOCKHEED MARTIN: "We never forget who we're working for."
WIKIPEDIA- Lynne Cheney served on Lockheed Corporation's board of directors from 1994 to 2001, a $120,000-a-year post she gave up shortly before her husband's inauguration…
I've heard that Obama has developed a problem with alcohol…hope this doesn't blur his judgment too much.
Good luck with this one boys. The stock futures are down sharply, the yen is rocketing higher. The Russians, Chinks, Iranians, Nork Koreans are still out there. I know that the destruction of Israel is the number one issue for Phil and his merry band of storm troopers but lots of luck with this guy.
The only good thing about this for a guy like me is that I don't want to hear about affirmative action or the underclass anymore.
The sword writes:
"I know that the destruction of Israel is the number one issue for Phil and his merry band of storm troopers but lots of luck with this guy."
Destruction of Israel?
Wishful thinking. Rahm Emanual,Dennis Ross,and Robert Rubin,have Obama's back.
On his left flank stand Jewish progressives,as well as labor unions that have drained their strike funds in support of Obama. For many unions,those Israeli bonds,need perpetual protection.
Like the stock market based pensions funds,
the unions are mortaged to Goldman Sachs,and their merry band of zionist oligarchs..
But there's hope. Americans are getting tired of fighting Israel's wars.
How many more American soldiers will be maimed and killed to protect Israel?
They are beginning to see that "it's the wolf that cries wolf"
Its a great day for the future of the planet, and for a revitalization of America.
And because of the work that we will do.
Sadly for me, the NY Times reported that the only three countries that informally polled opposed to Obama, were Israel, Georgia and the Philipines. (Who knows why the Philipines?)
I also don't have statistics on Jewish turnout.
Phil? (Just as information, no spin?)
I read the speeches. Its too early in the am to play them. I'll wake everyone up.
If John McCain had given the speech he gave in consolation during his campaign, he would have done much better.
I liked Obama's speech.
I can't imagine how long the two of them will sleep today.
Richard-The Phillipines are a Christian country with a major problem of Islamic terrorism. Bush (and I imagine McCain) are pretty popular throughout Eastern Europe. They and the countries you mentioned are not able to take their freedom for granted, as all the "progressives" in Europe and other places do.
I seriously doubt that Obama will be the failure that Bush was, and he couldn't have hoped for a weaker opponent than McCain. But I'm not comforted by a man with no experience who is as private as Obama is. What does he believe? He was given a pass on Jeremiah Wright, which was wrong. Only time will tell.
Sword of Gideon,
From one Jew to another – GROW UP. You're the jewish equivalent of these assholes like Ed, anon, Anonymous, MM, Todd. If I could put you all in a caged match to the death I wouldn't hesitate.
bar_kochba – Time to address those personal inferiority issues of yours. If I, as a jew, don't buy it, why should anyone else? You don't need to assimilate, just humble yourself. Trust me, if there is a God, she will appreciate it.
McCain gave the better speech. He reminded me of John Kerry in that the second the fight was over he sounded vastly less like a geriatric tape recorder and much more like a warm and intelligent human being.
SOG brings up the 1st good point he's ever made.
Is almighty President Obama going to continue the subjugation of white men to "affirmative action" discrimination?
Chuck making excuses for his failures in life…
Is that what it says in your little Marxist handbook? Anyone who expects equality before the law must be a failure?
Not much of an American are you? Let me guess, you probably think the entire US Constitution should be tossed…except for the good parts which ban guns and mandate abortion upon demand.
"You're the jewish equivalent of these assholes like Ed, anon, Anonymous, MM, Todd."
Which reminds of jewish incapacity at understanding human beings (always resorting to mental projections of evil creatures), for your list comprises of individuals none of them having any similarity but the desire for open democratic discussion of issues of power. On the other hand in this particular point you are right: soggy is an asshole, but he is only a more straightforward version of you.
As for 123_Bar_Cocoa it's either a kind of drink, or the magical words you speak when entering a caribbean bar on a hot afternoon before the great musical evening begins.
Hey Jewster, you're a lower species than SOG; although your contribution is calling people names without addressing their posted issues just like SOG, at least SOG once in a while states a semi-coherent issue as well.
Ed, Anonymous, MM, Todd–do please keep sharing with us your intelligent comments. America needs you desperately. Objectivity is a rare commodity.
Thanks to all who voted against McCain and Bushdom.
Richared Witty–the figure I saw was 70%, the direct opposite of
the absentee vote coming in from Israeli dual citizens.
Avnery's latest:
THAT REMINDS me of the German, the Frenchman, the Englishman and the Jew who decided to write about elephants. The German goes to Africa, returns after ten years and composes a five-volume tome: "A Foreword to a General Introduction to the Origins of the African Elephant". The Frenchman comes back after half a year and writes a slim and elegant volume: "The Love Life of Elephants". The Englishman returns after a week and produces a booklet: "How to Hunt Elephants". The Jew stays at home and writes an essay about "the Elephant and the Jewish Question".
I have never seen Obama look so sad as last night( specially after a personal achievement of such magnitude ). If his speech fell short of anyone's expectations, one has to remember, he lost someone very precious in his life. I felt, there were times, he was about to cry but I guess, he is a very private person and would grieve in privacy.
Ed, Anonymous, MM, Todd-recall prime perp Alan Greenspan's feeble acknowledgment of common sense after the fact when questioned
last in congress regarding the current economic catastrophe?
He made the same mistake regarding bankers that he had made defending the accounting industry back in the days of the S & L and Enron fall. He must have thought accountants and bankers were like a four year old given total freedom who wouldn't do what any such child would do….
Good thing Alan Greenspan was not a founding father, with his belief that reputation mattered when nobody would report the facts, blow the whistle in any effective way. Alan never learned Ayn Rand's characters were fictions.
Similarly, the self-identified Jews commenting here who like to call people banal names like "asshole."
Just consider their rigid ideology a form of learning disability and explain their learning problem as a disability stemming from their ideological straitjacket. Tough to give up privilege by birth.
Take heart Jewster, the extremists prefer one another and will often rally to one anothers' defense from the color grey.
Yes, just keep calling people who bring up annoying facts and principles "assholes." Nothing like calling calling gray black or white.
Jewster: "Ed, anon, Anonymous, MM, Todd. If I could put you all in a caged match to the death I wouldn't hesitate."
Spoken like a true Jewish Bolshevik. Judeofascists just love putting human beings in cages, pens, prisons, bantustans, gulags…it's how they deal with free speech and opposition to their totalitarian chicanery.
"Alan never learned Ayn Rand's characters were fictions."
Is he supposed to be some sort of Randian destroyer?
Greenspan was the ultimate ideologue, combined with his personal material interests. A real Zionist, so to speak. He is a perfect example of what happens over and over when sheeple never become people.