Bush: 'I'm sorry' the economic crisis is occurring-- By DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press Writer

President George W. Bush expressed remorse that the global financial crisis has cost jobs and harmed retirement accounts and said he'll back more government intervention if needed to ease the recession.

"I'm sorry it's happening, of course," Bush said in a wide-ranging interview with ABC's "World News," which was airing Monday. "Obviously I don't like the idea of people losing jobs, or being worried about their 401(k)s. On the other hand, the American people got to know that we will safeguard the system. I mean, we're in. And if we need to be in more, we will."

The U.S. economy fell into a recession in December 2007, the National Bureau of Economic Research reported on Monday. Many economists believe the current downturn will last until the middle of 2009 and will be the most severe slump since the 1981-82 recession.

On the war in Iraq, Bush said the biggest regret of his presidency was the "intelligence failure" regarding the extent of the Saddam Hussein threat to the United States. With the support of Congress, Bush ordered the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003 — a decision largely justified on grounds — later proved false — that Saddam was building weapons of mass destruction.

Asked if he would have ordered the U.S.-led invasion if intelligence reports had accurately indicated that Saddam did not have the weapons, Bush replied: "You know, that's an interesting question. That is a do-over that I can't do. It's hard for me to speculate."

During a discussion about what Americans should know about what it is like to be president, Bush was asked what he was most unprepared for going into the office.

"I think I was unprepared for war," he said. "In other words, I didn't campaign and say, `Please vote for me, I'll be able to handle an attack.' In other words, I didn't anticipate war. Presidents — one of the things about the modern presidency is that the unexpected will happen."

On the presidential election, Bush called Barack Obama's victory a "repudiation of Republicans."

"I'm sure some people voted for Barack Obama because of me," said Bush, who leaves office with low approval ratings. "I think most people voted for Barack Obama because they decided they wanted him to be in their living room for the next four years explaining policy. In other words, they made a conscious choice to put him in as president."

As he leaves office, Bush said he felt responsible for the economic downturn because it's occurring on his watch, but he added: "I think when the history of this period is written, people will realize a lot of the decisions that were made on Wall Street took place over a decade or so" before he became president.

He said he would like to see "instant liquidity" in the markets given the extent of the financial rescue plan, yet he understands that fear has paralyzed the markets.

"It is hard for the average citizen to understand how frozen the system became and how over-leveraged the system became," Bush said. "And so what we're watching is the de-leveraging of our financial markets, which is obviously affecting the growth of the economy."

Last week, the Bush administration and the Federal Reserve pledged $800 billion to break through blockades on credit cards, auto loans, mortgages and other borrowing. The latest moves raised U.S. commitments to contain the financial crisis to nearly $7 trillion — though no one thinks the government will actually spend that much.

The figures include loans that are expected to be repaid, loan authorities to back mortgages, purchases of stock in banks, guarantees to support loans among banks and pledges backing other transactions.

"This economy will recover," Bush said in the interview conducted last Wednesday at the Camp David, Md., presidential retreat. "And when it recovers, many of the assets backed by the government now will be redeemed, and we will — could conceivably — make money off of some of the holdings."

Later in the interview, he said: "I can't guarantee that we'll get all our money back, but it's conceivable we could."

Bush: Iraq intelligence failure 'biggest regret'

US President George W. Bush said in an interview set for broadcast Monday that he came to office "unprepared for war" and that his "biggest regret" was the US "intelligence failure" on Iraq.

In a wide-ranging exchange with ABC television's "World News Tonight," Bush also said he was "sorry" that the global economic meltdown was taking place and predicted that he would leave office January 20th with his "head held high."

The US president has been mired in record-low approval ratings after the botched government response to killer Hurricane Katrina (2005) and amid wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as the world financial crisis.

"The biggest regret of all the presidency has to have been the intelligence failure in Iraq," Bush said 50 days before president-elect Barack Obama's inauguration. "I wish the intelligence had been different, I guess."

But Bush refused to say whether he would have ordered the March 2003 invasion if he had known that late dictator Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, calling it "an interesting question."

"That is a do-over that I can't do. It's hard for me to speculate," said Bush, who declared as recently as last week that Saddam's ouster was "the right decision then -- and it is the right decision today."

More than 4,200 US troops have died in Iraq since Bush launched the war after a months-long public campaign centered on the charge -- later proved false -- that Saddam possessed vast stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction.

"A lot of people put their reputations on the line and said the weapons of mass destruction is a reason to remove Saddam Hussein. It wasn't just people in my administration," Bush told ABC.

Asked what his greatest accomplishment was, the US president replied: "I keep recognizing we're in a war against ideological thugs and keeping America safe."

Asked what he was most unprepared for when he took office in January 2001, Bush replied: "I think I was unprepared for war. In other words, I didn't campaign and say, 'Please vote for me, I'll be able to handle an attack.'"

"In other words, I didn't anticipate war. Presidents -- one of the things about the modern presidency is that the unexpected will happen," he said.

Bush, whose administration recently accepted a formal timeline for withdrawing from Iraq, also stood fast behind his refusal for years to set a pull-out timetable.

"It would have compromised the principle that when you put kids into harm's way, you go in to win," he said.

Asked about the global economic crisis, Bush declared "I'm sorry it's happening, of course," but rejected any effort to blame his administration for inaction in the face of growing concerns.

"I'm the president during this period of time, but I think when the history of this period is written, people will realize a lot of the decisions that were made on Wall Street took place over a decade or so," he said.

Bush also described much of his time in office as "joyful" even though "the president ends up carrying a lot of people's grief in his soul during a presidency."

"I don't feel joyful when somebody loses their life, nor do I feel joyful when somebody loses a job. That concerns me," he said. "But the idea of being able to serve a nation you love has been joyful."

Asked what Americans would say when he left office, Bush replied: "I hope they feel that this is a guy that came, didn't sell his soul for politics, had to make some tough decisions, and did so in a principled way."

"I will leave the presidency with my head held high."

US Sen. Mel Martinez won't seek re-election--By BRENDAN FARRINGTON and MARK WANGRIN, Associated Press

U.S. Sen. Mel Martinez of Florida, who has struggled to boost his approval ratings because of close ties to President George W. Bush, announced Tuesday he will not seek a second term in 2010.

His seat was widely seen as vulnerable in two years, but Martinez, a Republican, rejected suggestions he faced difficult re-election prospects in a state won last month by Democrat Barack Obama.

"I've faced much tougher obstacles in my life," Martinez said. "My decision is not based on re-election prospects, but on what on what I want to do with the next eight years of my life."

Martinez, 62, was elected in 2004 after serving as the U.S. secretary for Housing and Urban Development during the Bush administration. He served as general chairman of the Republican National Committee for 10 months, resigning in October 2007.

Martinez was born in Cuba. At the age of 15, he fled to America as part of a Catholic humanitarian effort called Operation Pedro Pan. Catholic charitable groups provided Martinez, who was alone and spoke virtually no English, a temporary home at two youth facilities. He then lived with two foster families, with whom he remains close. He was reunited with his family in Orlando in 1966.

In appointing Martinez in 2001, Bush said he was "the embodiment of the American Dream."

___
Associated Press Writer Brendan Farrington reported from Tallahassee, Fla.

Specter: 'I'll be prepared' for 2010 race--By the Associated Press

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., says he's ready for a tough re-election race in 2010, whether it's against MSNBC pundit Chris Matthews or someone else.

Specter, 78, declined to speculate on whether he would face Matthews, who reportedly met with Pennsylvania Democratic Party leaders last week about a run. But the GOP moderate said he expected challenges from the left and right as he seeks a sixth term.

"I never look over my shoulder, never look behind. Somebody may be gaining on me. I run with blinders. I'll be prepared, whoever my opponents are," Specter said on CNN's "Late Edition."

Sen. Robert Menendez, D-N.J., the head of his party's campaign arm, said he has neither spoken with Matthews, a native Philadelphian, nor any intermediaries for him about a possible challenge to Specter.

"We'll see who decides to run. I haven't seen any firm announcement by anyone," Menendez said on the same program.

There was no immediate response from Matthews Sunday to a message left for him through an NBC spokeswoman.

The 62-year-old Matthews' contract with MSNBC expires in June. He has worked in Democratic politics before, running unsuccessfully for a northeast Philadelphia congressional seat in 1974 and working for former President Jimmy Carter and former House Speaker Thomas P. "Tip" O'Neill Jr.

His brother, Jim Matthews, is on the Montgomery County Board of Commissioners in suburban Philadelphia.

Specter made it clear that he would vigorously defend his seat.

"Feeling good," quipped the Republican, who has survived bouts with a brain tumor and cancer while serving in the Senate. "Top of my game."

Palin implores Ga. Republicans to back Chambliss--By SHANNON McCAFFREY, Associated Press Writer

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin urged Georgia voters to back Sen. Saxby Chambliss in Tuesday's runoff in an election eve appeal that underscored her popularity within the Republican Party and the GOP's efforts to stave off erosion of its shrinking Senate numbers.

"Losing an election doesn't mean we have lost our way," the former vice presidential candidate told a cheering crowd of 2,500 on Monday in the central Georgia town of Perry. "If we are to lead again, we have lots of hard work ahead of us. Let it begin here tomorrow in Georgia."

Palin's campaign appearances for Chambliss — four total — were her first since she and Republican presidential nominee John McCain stumbled on Nov. 4. Georgia Republicans clearly were looking ahead, with supporters waiting in the cold for more than an hour to attend the rallies. Vendors in Augusta sold bright pink "Palin 2012" T-shirts and "Palin for President: You Go Girl" buttons. Chants of "Sa-rah!" greeted Palin.

Palin highlighted Chambliss' conservative record of supporting gun rights and opposing abortion. Faced with the prospect of Democrats padding their Senate numbers — they are two votes shy of the 60 needed to thwart Republican filibusters — Palin said it was critical to elect the first-term Republican lawmaker.

"We must send Saxby back to the United States Senate," Palin told the crowd in Augusta.

In the general election, Chambliss fell short of crossing the 50 percent threshold in a three-way race against Democrat Jim Martin and a Libertarian candidate, Allen Buckley, who drew 3.4 percent of the vote. The runoff between Chambliss and Martin will help determine the balance of power in Washington. Georgia is one of two undecided contests, with a recount under way in Minnesota in the tight race between Republican Sen. Norm Coleman and Democrat Al Franken.

All signs from early voting for the runoff pointed toward Chambliss holding the seat.

The contest has attracted almost 500,000 early voters and some 36 percent are white males, typically a solid Republican constituency in the state. In the weeks leading up to the general election, white males cast about 27 percent of the more than 2 million early votes.

Less than 23 percent of the early voters for the runoff are black — a drop from the surge of black voters in the run-up to the general election. Black voters made up more than 34 percent of the 2 million early voters before the Nov. 4 contest when President-elect Barack Obama was on the ballot.

Palin cast the Georgia runoff as the first step in rehabilitating the Republican Party, wounded by losses in November including the defeat of the McCain-Palin ticket.

"It takes rebuilding and I say let that begin here in Georgia tomorrow," Palin said.

Palin said she has a soft spot for Georgia where her eldest son, Track, trained at Fort Benning before deploying to Iraq.

"You took good care of my son," Palin said.

Martin is touring the state Monday with prominent Georgia Democrats, including Rep. John Lewis of Atlanta. He'll cap the day with a state Capitol rally with the Atlanta hip hop artist Ludacris.

Rep. Jack Kingston, R-Ga., warmed up a crowd of about 2,000 at Palin and Chambliss' second stop in Savannah by taking a dig at Martin for campaigning with a rapper who has written some raunchy lyrics. "Would you play that for your momma?" Kingston said of Ludacris' music.

"I think Jim Martin should be with Ludacris," Kingston said. "It would be ludicrous to vote for Jim Martin."

Martin had asked President-elect Barack Obama to campaign with him. Obama recorded a radio ad and automated phone calls for Martin but did not campaign in the state. Some 100 Obama field operatives traveled to the state to help with turnout.

Several Republicans have campaigned for Chambliss, including one-time presidential candidates Rudy Giuliani, Mike Huckabee and Mitt Romney. McCain campaigned in the state last month, but only Palin was tapped for election eve and four Georgia stops, reflecting her star status. Tommy Byler, 22, of Savannah marveled at the size of the crowd Palin drew compared to other top-tier Republicans who have campaigned for Chambliss.

"I went to see Mitt Romney a week ago, and I think there were only about 100 people there," said Byler, who wore a T-shirt emblazoned with Palin's face and the words "Sarah Palin Is My Homegirl."

Former President Bill Clinton and former Vice President Al Gore have campaigned for Martin.

Georgia's last U.S. Senate runoff was in 1992. Democratic Sen. Wyche Fowler pulled more votes in the general election but lost to Republican Paul Coverdell in the runoff.

___
Associated Press writer Russ Bynum in Savannah and Elliott Minor in Perry contributed to this report.

Obama from change agent to pragmatist--By ROBERT BURNS, Associated Press Writer

The selection of experienced centrists — Hillary Rodham Clinton, Robert Gates and James L. Jones — to head President-elect Barack Obama's national security team points to the possibility that on Iraq, the incoming commander-in-chief may take a more measured path to ending American military involvement than he described during the presidential campaign.

Obama's choices signal a more pragmatic, less ideological approach to asserting American leadership in the world. In announcing on Monday that Clinton is his choice for secretary of state and that Gates has agreed to remain as defense secretary — with Jones as national security adviser in the White House — Obama said he has intentionally surrounded himself with "strong personalities and strong opinions." And he made clear that when push comes to shove, he will be the one to make the tough calls.

Gates in particular has opposed setting a hard deadline for removing U.S. forces from Iraq, but he also has emphasized the need to transition the U.S. military mission from combat to support for Iraqi forces. And Gates shares Obama's view that some resources now in Iraq should be shifted to Afghanistan.

Obama will likely rely on Jones, who spent 40 years in the Marine Corps but has never served in the executive branch of government, to lay the groundwork by melding the views of Clinton and Gates.

In an Associated Press interview shortly after Obama's announcement in Chicago, Jones he feels well prepared for his expected role in building consensus among the key players on national security.

"I've always felt that the more senior I got, even in the military, the more important is the art of making people feel like they own part of the problem and also part of the solution. Raising consensus is important," he said.

"At the end of the day, when you need a decision you need to be able to go to the boss and say, `Okay, here is how things line up and here are the options and here's my recommendation and what do you want to do?'"

Loren Thompson, chief operating officer of the Lexington Institute, a Washington research group, said the combination of Clinton, Gates and Jones appears to fit well with Obama's pledge to be pragmatic when it comes to decisions about the use of military force and in building overseas alliances.

"The tone is centrist and non-ideological, which is quite a change from the Bush administration," he said.

In his younger days in the Marine Corps, Jones, 64, was known to some as "the Hawk" — not as a reflection of his defense views but as a comment on the prominence of his nose. Today he is widely seen as nonpartisan; during the campaign he informally advised both Obama and John McCain.

Gates, while closely associated with a Republican administration, also has served in the White House during Democratic presidencies. At his news conference Monday, Obama said he didn't ask Gates to remain at the Pentagon because of his party affiliation, although he has promised to have a Republican in his Cabinet.

"The point here is that I didn't going around checking people's political registration," Obama said. "What I was most concerned with was whether or not they can serve the interests of the American people."

The president-elect said he was parting ways with recent practice by assembling a diverse group of national security leaders.

"One of the dangers in a White House, based on my reading of history, is that you get wrapped up in group-think and everybody agrees with everything and there's no discussion and there are no dissenting views," he said. "So I am going to be welcoming a vigorous debate inside the White House.

"But understand, I will be setting policy as president. I will be responsible for the vision that this team carries out, and I will expect them to implement that vision once decisions are made."

Obama said he intends to stick to his campaign pledge to get U.S. combat forces out of Iraq within 16 months of taking office. But he also appeared to leave himself some wiggle room on the timetable.

"I believe that 16 months is the right timeframe," he said. "But as I have said consistently, I will listen to the recommendations of my commanders. And my number one priority is making sure that our troops remain safe in this transition phase and that the Iraqi people are well served by a government that is taking on increased responsibility for its own security."

In the AP interview, Jones said that the role of energy — including U.S. dependence on foreign sources of oil — deserves to play a bigger part in the U.S. government's national security deliberations and decision making. That meshes with one of the main messages Obama trumpeted during his campaign.

"National security is a broader portfolio in the 21st century than just the National Security Council, the State Department and the Defense Department," Jones said. "It's got to include energy."

Jones stressed that even though gasoline prices have fallen dramatically in recent weeks, the Obama administration can be expected to keep a sharp focus on seeking a long-term energy security policy.

"We're in an energy crisis. It would be foolish to take our eye off the ball and say we don't have an energy crisis anymore. We do," he said. "It's part of the national security portfolio and it will be treated as such. The breadth of national security issues is going to widen and we'll try to put together a National Security Council team that reflects that new reality."

Gates' press secretary, Geoff Morrell, said Obama and Gates apparently set no end date for him at the Pentagon.

"My understanding is the secretary and the president-elect agreed that the period of his continued service will be open-ended," Morrell said.

___
EDITOR'S NOTE — Robert Burns has covered national security affairs for the AP since 1990.

5 things the war Cabinet says about Obama--By: Jim VandeHei, Mike Allen

President-elect Obama made official the worst-kept secret in Washington this morning: that his national security team will be headlined by a bitter political rival (Clinton) and a member of President Bush’s war cabinet (Gates).

Beyond the obvious symbolism, however, Monday’s moves also offer some important evidence on the best-kept secret of the past two years: how will a President Obama actually govern in these troubled times?

The parlor game of who gets what job is largely over, save a few of the less prestigious cabinet gigs. Here is what today’s announcement – combined with the unveiling of his top White House staff and economic team – tell us about the 44th president as he prepares to take over.

1. He is an intellectual, who is more impressed by academic and governing credentials than familiarity and loyalty.

New York Times columnist David Brooks nailed it recently when he called the emerging cabinet a “valedictocracy”: a team of the nation’s first-in-class Ivy League elites. He meant it as a compliment. He’s not alone: it’s hard to find Republicans who don’t express admiration (at least in private) for the emerging Obama team.

Of the 18 top appointments announced so far, 12 have degrees from Ivy League institutions, Stanford or MIT. Susan Rice was a Rhodes Scholar; Larry Summers was the youngest tenured professor in Harvard history and Greg Craig, the top White House lawyer, attended Exeter, Harvard, Cambridge and Yale.

Few of the early picks could be considered Obama loyalists. Hillary Rodham Clinton thought she would be banished to the outer reaches of Obama’s world. Now, she’s secretary of state. Robert Gates thought he was headed for retirement. Now, he will run war policy for anti-war Obama. The victor has proved to be anything but vindictive.

There could be a cost to having so many high achievers around the same table. Bush’s war Cabinet was also praised for its experience and gravitas, but wound up being a dysfunctional snake pit.

2. He is willing to take big risks.

His economic and national-security teams are getting packed with huge personalities who see themselves as architects, not assembly-line workers. The potential for big clashes in tough times is high. But so is the potential for big results.

Hillary Clinton could be a fabulous world diplomat, considering her familiarity with leaders and global problems. She could also be a disaster if the Clinton family’s penchant for personal and political dramas distract the Obama presidency. Gates could be the perfect man to end the Iraq war: A Bush appointee with strong ties to the GOP establishment. Or he could clash with the new, outsized personalities around him. And don’t forget: Joe Biden is vice president and deference isn’t his specialty.

Ego management will also be a necessity on the economic team. Lawrence Summers, who will be the White House economic adviser, was so harshly critical of colleagues when he was Clinton’s Treasury secretary that the president himself once urged him to stay respectful of colleagues at a cabinet meeting, Democrats recalled. Tim Geithner, the new Treasury secretary, worked under Summers in the Clinton years. Now it’s Geithner who’ll be the public face of the economic team - and former colleagues are imagining a delicate dance between the headstrong mentor and his former protégé. .

3. He is very focused on governing—and prefers persuasion to force.

Obama inherits what every president dreams of: a Congress controlled by his party and with strong majorities. Unlike Bush, he seems to genuinely care what they think.

Many Republicans resented the way Bush simply dismissed the power and input of Congress. He saw his victories as mandates to implement his agenda and was dismissive of naysayers in either party. Obama seems to making a different calculation: Democrats can win big if they proceed with something resembling a parliamentary approach to governance.

Rahm Emanuel, the incoming chief of staff, specializes in legislative strategy. He has been knee-deep in economic discussions with Capitol Hill leaders for weeks – and his position of great power was comforting to Hill veterans. He has even met with Senate Republicans.

The choice of former Senator Majority Leader Tom Daschle as secretary of Health and Human Services sends a powerful signal that Obama wants health care to clear the highest hurdle -- the Senate. In fact, his team looks like a high-powered meeting on the Hill – Emanuel, Daschle, Biden and Pete Rouse, who was Obama’s chief of staff in the Senate and will be a senior adviser in the West Wing.

4. He isn’t so disdainful of the “Washington insiders” after all

Much of the media focus has been on how Obama has surrounded himself with “rivals” or “moderates.” But from one perspective what’s most surprising about them is how unsurprising they are—they are a roster of the Democratic establishment.

It is clear now the “change” Obama will bring to Washington will center around his personal style and values, not the cast of characters by his side. In fact, it is easy to envision a President-elect Hillary Clinton making many of the same picks.

Obama has basically plucked the government-in-waiting that got its start under Bill Clinton, sharpened its thinking at think tanks such as the Center for American Progress and been involved in virtually every policy debate since.

Their bonds, for now, matter more than any minor differences of governing emphasis. Indeed, many of the old Democratic fault lines matter less now that both wings of the party agree the government needs to spend more in the near-term to help the economy and that the military should have a carefully modulated exit strategy from Iraq.

Of course the Democrats’ intramural debates could get interesting again once the Obama team gets focused on specific questions: How much (on spending) and how fast (on Iraq)?

5. He is willing to jettison campaign promises to suit the political landscape

Every president does it, but Obama is breaking (or at least bending) a stack of promises even before he takes office.

His staff has spread the word that he will not immediately push his plan to raise taxes on the rich by repealing the Bush tax cuts. Many Democrats predict he will hit the brakes on the movement to make it easier to force unionization of the workplace – a core demand of his most loyal supporters that could get a lower priority as he scrambles to head off a depression. And Obama has signaled that liberal dreams like the repeal of the military’s don’t-ask-don’t-tell policy on gays in the military will take a back seat to more practical elements of his agenda aimed at helping struggling middle-class families.

Remember his assault on lobbyists? That has quieted, too. He has put lobbyists in prime positions on transition teams – and shown little interest in really clamping down on their role in this town.

In part, his shifts show that he can read the election returns, and has advisers who are already thinking ahead to 2012. (His first domestic trip as president-elect will be on Tuesday to swing state Pennsylvania.) America isn’t a 50-50 nation in 2008. But a 53-46 nation – the final percentages for Obama and McCain on Election Day – means that the new president will stay focused on the political and ideological center. If he tries to move that center in a leftward direction, it will be in a slow and careful fashion.

Obama's national-security team centrist but not visionary--By Nancy A. Youssef, McClatchy Newspapers

The members of the national security team that President-elect Barack Obama named Monday are all strong-willed public servants who at times have vehemently disagreed with changes he proposes to U.S. national-security policy.

His future national security adviser quite possibly voted for his opponent in the presidential election. His future secretary of state said the United States should consider the "obliteration" of Iran , where Obama has advocated talks without preconditions. His future defense secretary directed the military's surge of additional U.S. forces into Iraq , which Obama opposed.

Despite those past differences, what matters is how their views might change now that they're part of an administration led by Obama and insulated from domestic politics.

Will Secretary of State Hillary Clinton embrace his call for talking to Iran ? Will Secretary of Defense Robert Gates back Obama's plan to withdraw from Iraq ? Will National Security Adviser and retired Marine Gen. Jim Jones , a former military commander of NATO , embrace Obama's call to engage with Russia ?

Obama named the three Monday along with Eric Holder as attorney general, Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano as homeland security secretary and Susan Rice , a former assistant secretary of state, as United Nations ambassador. The president-elect has yet to name a new CIA director.

Despite Obama's campaign promise of change, Clinton, Gates and Jones pride themselves on being career public servants, not visionaries. Introducing them Monday, Obama said they'd bring a "vigorous debate" to the White House , and that he'd bring the change.

"They operate within a familiar, centrist framework," said Andrew Bacevich , a professor of international relations at Boston University . "But they have not been willing to ask fundamental questions about national security. . . . The vision will come from the president."

Obama has said that under his administration, national security will be less dependent on military prowess and more on diplomacy. He's called for more money for the State Department and foreign aid. He's said he wants to draw down troops in Iraq to make a bigger push in Afghanistan . Where the Bush administration has resisted high-level direct talks with Iran and Syria , Obama has called for more dialogue.

Despite serving under the Bush administration, Gates has been a maverick. He's endorsed boosting the State Department budget and has said the "long war" on terrorism is in Afghanistan , not Iraq .

Despite that, the leaders of Obama's national security team not only have disagreed publicly with the president-elect but they've also disagreed with one another.

Until now, domestic and partisan political considerations largely have shaped Clinton's foreign-policy views, but as secretary of state, those considerations should be irrelevant.

"She's been hawkish on a number of issues not because she's hawkish but because she was trying to prove that she isn't soft on defense," said one congressional staffer who's familiar with her work on the Senate Armed Services Committee and who refused to be identified in discussing her. "I wouldn't assume anything now."

Clinton and Obama have disagreed most notably on Iran . During the presidential campaign, she called his willingness to talk to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without preconditions naive. When she said that she'd "obliterate" Iran as president if it attacked Israel , Obama likened her to President George W. Bush .

Gates served on the Iraq Study Group in 2006, which called for talks with Iran and Syria .

Jones, who's a close friend of John McCain , the defeated Republican presidential contender, has said that more resources are needed in Afghanistan . Gates has pleaded with U.S. allies to send more troops. Gates, Clinton and Obama have called for linking U.S. policy in Pakistan and Afghanistan , saying that one can't be solved without the other.

However, Clinton criticized Obama for his call for unilateral action against targets in Pakistan if necessary.

The president-elect and his secretary of defense disagree on missile defense. As Bush's defense secretary, Gates, a former Soviet expert during his long tenure as an analyst at the CIA , has made several trips to Russia and Eastern Europe advocating a ballistic missile-defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic , drawing the ire of Russians. Obama is likely to pull back on the Bush administration's push for such a system.

However, both have said that the United States should engage more with Russia .

There also have been differences on Iraq . Jones opposed a timetable for withdrawal as Obama campaigned for a 16-month plan. Obama opposed the surge strategy, which Gates backed.

Despite those differences, observers said that collectively they represent a strong national security team.

"I think they represent a team of professionals," said retired Army Lt. Col. John Nagl , who helped craft the counterinsurgency manual with Gen. David Petraeus , the current head of the U.S. Central Command, which is responsible for Iraq and Afghanistan , among other countries. "These are not ideologues, people with a preconceived notion of ideas. I think this is a return to realism."

Clinton's India ties may complicate Obama policy--By MATTHEW LEE and PETE YOST, Associated Press Writers

The close ties with India that Secretary of State-nominee Hillary Rodham Clinton forged during her years as a U.S. senator and presidential candidate could complicate diplomatic perceptions of her ability to serve as a neutral broker between India and its nuclear neighbor, Pakistan.

With tensions rising between India and Pakistan after last week's deadly terrorist attacks in Mumbai, Hillary Clinton faces an early test of her influence in South Asia, where President-elect Barack Obama on Monday said that instability and the rise of militants pose "the single most important threat against the American people."

Both Hillary Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, have maintained warm relations for years with India and the Indian-American community. As New York's senator for eight years and as a 2008 presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton toured India and visited with Indian officials and entrepreneurs, and her campaigns profited from the largesse of Indian-American fundraisers. Bill Clinton's charitable foundation has been funded by some of the same well-heeled Indian businessmen who backed his wife's campaigns.

In her new role as the nation's top diplomat, Hillary Clinton would project Obama's policies, not her own. But even foreign affairs experts who wave off suggestions that Hillary Clinton would lean toward either Asian power acknowledge that the perception of such a tilt could cause suspicions in Pakistan. South Asia experts reject the assertion of bias, but they acknowledge it exists.

"There are some who believe it, but I think most people think she is an objective observer with a good understanding of South Asia," said Walter Andersen, Associate Director of the South Asia Studies Program at Johns Hopkins University's School for Advanced International Studies. Andersen insisted perceptions of Hillary Clinton's bias toward India are "based on inaccuracy."

Karin Von Hippel, a South Asia expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, agreed, saying Hillary Clinton is "very balanced" and "understands almost better than anybody how delicate the situation is between these two countries."

Still, perceptions matter, especially in the region. "There are concerns that she is seen as pro-India, she and her husband both," said one Washington-based foreign diplomat with extensive experience in South Asia. "The Pakistanis definitely see them as closer and friendlier to India."

The diplomat spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the sensitive issue of India and Pakistan, which have fought three wars — two of them over the disputed Himalayan region of Kashmir — since winning independence from Britain.

Influential members of the Indian-American community have rejoiced in Hillary Clinton's selection as secretary of state.

"Sen. Clinton will continue the close relationship between the United States and India that started with the Clinton administration and has progressed in the Bush years," said Varun Nikore, founder of the Indian-American Leadership Initiative, an independent political organization supporting Democratic candidates.

"You cannot expect that any nominee for secretary of state would have a special relationship going into this job, but we're very lucky that we have in Sen. Clinton someone who is already well-versed on one of the more important countries and emerging economies in the world," said Nikore.

A current State Department official allowed that Bill Clinton had substantially boosted engagement with India, but noted that any administration would likely have done so. The official stressed that President George W. Bush has continued that course, most recently signing a civilian nuclear pact with New Delhi.

"None of this has been meant to exclude Pakistan, but it is a zero-sum game when you are dealing with these two countries," the official said. "You can't do something with one without it affecting the other." The official spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal administration thinking.

Ties between the United States and India improved dramatically, as did Pakistani suspicions of pro-India bias in Washington, during Bill Clinton's administration, which embraced India as a major power and market as it opened its economy in the 1990s.

The administration's disparate treatment of India and Pakistan was most apparent during a 2000 Asian trip, with the president spending five days in India and seven hours in Pakistan.

The Clinton White House barred media coverage of the Pakistan stop and released only an official photo of Bill Clinton and Gen. Pervez Musharraf seated among aides, 12 feet across from each other. Bill Clinton admonished Pakistan's military government to retreat from its nuclear weapons course and to lower dangerous tensions with India.

In a speech to India's Parliament on that trip, Bill Clinton said he shared many of New Delhi's concerns about "the course Pakistan is taking; your disappointment that past overtures have not always met with success; your outrage over recent violence. I know it is difficult to be a democracy bordered by nations whose governments reject democracy."

Early during her presidential campaign in 2008, the former first lady pointed to the "strong partnership" that Bill Clinton forged between India and the U.S. As New York's senator, Hillary Clinton also touted her role as co-chair of the Senate India Caucus.

"As president I will work with India to make our strong friendship even stronger," Hillary Clinton promised earlier this year.

During the presidential campaign, Indian-Americans reciprocated Hillary Clinton's long-standing embrace of India by giving generously — $2 million at a single fundraiser in New York in 2007.

At one point, the Obama camp prepared, but then disavowed, a campaign memo that carried the headline "Hillary Clinton (D-Punjab)," a mocking play on the standard reference to a candidates' party and constituency.

The memo, which created a furor in India and the Indian-American community, also referred to the Clintons' investments in India, Sen. Clinton's fundraising among Indian-Americans and the former president's $300,000 in speech fees from Cisco, a company that has moved U.S. jobs to India.

Obama called the memo "a dumb mistake" and "not reflective of the long-standing relationship I have had with the Indian-American community."

Now as president-elect, Obama has chosen Hillary Clinton to be his chief diplomat and highlighted India and Pakistan as priorities for his administration.

"The situation in South Asia as a whole and the safe havens for terrorists that have been established there represent the single most important threat against the American people," he told reporters at a news conference Monday as he unveiled his foreign policy and national security team, including Hillary Clinton.

___
Associated Press writer Devlin Barrett contributed to this report.

Clinton nomination comes after serious courtship--By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer

Barack Obama had his eye on Hillary Rodham Clinton as secretary of state for some time, but it took some serious courtship before the two took their relationship to the next level Monday.

Clinton's nomination as secretary of state came after concessions from both sides — Clinton got assurances that she could name her own staff at the State Department, and former President Bill Clinton offered to take steps to prevent any conflict of interest in his international dealings while his wife would be the country's top diplomat.

The nomination is the latest chapter in a complicated relationship between Clinton and Obama. The two struggled bitterly over the Democratic nomination, with Clinton persisting in her fight against Obama even when her prospects for victory were virtually dead. The hard feelings softened during the general election when Clinton campaigned in support of Obama and finally they have settled on a boss-employer relationship that would have been almost unimaginable when the presidential race began.

One person close to Clinton said she began to hear rumors in the days after Obama's election Nov. 4 that he was considering her for the post, but she didn't get confirmation that he was really interested until he reached out on Nov. 12 and asked her to meet him the next day to discuss it. Clinton flew to Chicago secretly, but the meeting became public knowledge after she was introduced to staffers around the office and her departing motorcade was spied by reporters outside Obama's office.

In the coming weeks, Obama and Clinton had several conversations about her taking the job — one Clinton associate described it as the five or six "dates" required before they could form a union. Meanwhile, lawyers representing both sides met to work out details including financial disclosure issues involving former President Bill Clinton's finances.

There was a concern that the former president's international dealings could create a conflict of interest if his wife was representing the U.S. government around the world. The former first couple had refused to disclose the donors to his library and the Clinton Global Initiative during the presidential campaign, saying some contributors had been promised anonymity.

Transition head John Podesta led the talks, along with Obama adviser Todd Stern and Tom Perrelli, a classmate of the president-elect from Harvard Law School. The Clintons were represented by longtime advisers Cheryl Mills, Doug Band and Bruce Lindsey.

After two days of negotiations at the law office where incoming White House counsel Greg Craig works, both sides had made their concessions. Bill Clinton offered to release the names of all his donors, as well as other steps that include submitting his speeches for State Department review.

Clinton's request to choose her own staff means that she will have even more influence over State Department policy. She has a group of fiercely loyal allies who have long been working to protect her, and career diplomats are already grumbling about her bringing in her people.

Dan Bartlett, who was President George W. Bush's communications director, said high-level Cabinet positions often involve some give-and-take, although the extent of negotiations with the Clintons was clearly more intense because of the complexities surrounding the former president. He said Hillary Clinton was smart to negotiate the right to name her own staff.

"It's always a request, but that one is rarely given," Bartlett said. But he said almost any request can be worked out. "Most of the time, if a president really wants somebody you'll always find a way to get a yes."

Obama said it wasn't a "light bulb moment" that led to the very unconventional idea of putting his one-time foe as his top diplomat. He said he always admired her and wanted to find a way to collaborate with her, with the secretary of state idea emerging after the election. But one senior adviser said Obama had been thinking about it long before that time, believing she would bring instant stature and credibility to U.S. diplomatic relations.

Clinton confidants said she struggled with the thought of giving up the Senate seat that is the only office she ever won in her own right to serve at Obama's pleasure. Clinton herself looked pained as she spoke Monday about the difficulty of stepping down from the office, but she ultimately decided that being secretary of state is the best way to serve her country during a defining moment where Americans are demanding change.

___
On the Net:
Obama transition: http:/www.change.gov

Obama taps Clinton, Gates for US 'new dawn' abroad--By LIZ SIDOTI, Associated Press Writer Liz Sidoti, Associated Press Writer

Barack Obama promised "a new dawn of American leadership" in a troubled world Monday, announcing a strong-willed national security team headed by Hillary Rodham Clinton, who fought him long and bitterly for the presidency, and Robert Gates, the man who has been running two wars for George W. Bush.

The president-elect said he hadn't changed his mind about bringing most U.S. combat troops home from Iraq within 16 months but added a cautionary note — he'll consult with his military commanders first.

While his new team may be a bit more centrist — some war opponents might even say hawkish — than many Obama supporters might prefer, he said the withdrawal timetable he emphasized in the presidential campaign is still "the right time frame."

Clinton, as secretary of state, and Gates, remaining as defense secretary, will be the most prominent faces — besides Obama's own — of the new administration's effort to revamp U.S. policy abroad.

At a Chicago news conference, Obama also tapped top advisers Eric Holder as attorney general and Susan Rice as ambassador to the United Nations. He named Arizona Gov. Janet Napolitano to be homeland security secretary and retired Marine Gen. James Jones as White House national security adviser.

The choices had been telegraphed days earlier but were remarkable all the same — still another major turn in Clinton's extraordinary career, a show of faith in Gates and action to support Obama's frequent talk of desiring robust debate among seasoned, opinionated people in his inner circle.

Denouncing White House "group think," Obama signaled a break from President Bush's tendency toward an insular management style and go-with-the-gut diplomacy.

"The time has come for a new beginning," said Obama, flanked by flags on a stage with Vice President-elect Joe Biden and his six newest appointees. While Gates will stay at the Pentagon, Obama said the military's new mission will be "responsibly ending the war in Iraq through a successful transition to Iraqi control."

He said a newly completed agreement between Iraq and the Bush administration covering U.S. troops signals "a transition period in which our mission is changing." He added: "It indicates we are now on a glide path to reduce our forces in Iraq."

Obama has now selected half his Cabinet, including the high-profile jobs at State, Defense, Justice and Treasury. A week ago, he named his economic team, led by Timothy Geithner as treasury secretary. And soon he plans to announce New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson as commerce secretary and former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle as health and human services secretary.

Obama's picks suggest he is mindful of his own relative inexperience; most of the appointees have decades more experience in government than he does as a former one-term Illinois senator. The selections also reflect his long-voiced desire to invite divergent viewpoints to chart the best course for the country.

"I assembled this team because I'm a strong believer in strong personalities and strong opinions," he said. "I think that's how the best decisions are made. ... So I'm going to be welcoming a vigorous debate inside the White House."

"But understand I will be setting policy as president," he added. He said he will be responsible for "the vision that this team carries out, and I expect them to implement that vision once decisions are made."

Quoting Harry S. Truman, Obama said: "The buck will stop with me."

"The time has come for a new beginning, a new dawn of American leadership to overcome the challenges of the 21st century," Obama said.

Without naming Bush or directly referring to what administration critics see as America's tarnished world image over the past eight years, Obama called for a new strategy for dealing with global issues.

"We're going to have to bring the full force of our power, not only military but also diplomatic, economic, and political, to deal with those threats not only to keep America safe but also to ensure that peace and prosperity will exist around the world," he said.

Referring to his security team, Obama said: "They share my pragmatism about the use of power and my sense of purpose about America's role as a leader in the world."

Asked by reporters about his choice of Clinton, who traded barbs with him and questioned his readiness for the presidency during the campaign, he praised her and shrugged off any suggestions of future problems.

He said of the New York senator, "She possesses an extraordinary intelligence and toughness, and a remarkable work ethic. ... She is an American of tremendous stature who will have my complete confidence, who knows many of the world's leaders, who will command respect in every capital and who will clearly have the ability to advance our interests around the world."

The former first lady was short and sweet in her brief turn at the lectern: "I am proud to join you ... and may God bless you and our great country."

Likewise, Gates said he was "honored to serve President-elect Obama."

He said he was "mindful that we are engaged in two wars and face other serious challenges at home and around the world."

"I must do my duty as they do theirs," he said of the men and women in uniform in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. "How could I do otherwise?"

At the news conference, Obama expressed sympathy for the victims of the terror attacks in Mumbai but twice declined to say whether the Indian government would be justified in pursuing terrorists in next-door Pakistan.

"This is one of those times when I have to reiterate there is one president at a time," he said. "We're going to be engaged in some very delicate diplomacy in the next days and weeks, and I think it would be very inappropriate of me to comment."

Obama had drawn criticism during the campaign — including from Clinton — when he said the United States would be justified in pursuing al-Qaida terrorists in Pakistan if it had "actionable intelligence."

Clinton will give up her seat as a senator from New York to join the Cabinet. Her appointment was preceded by lengthy negotiations involving her husband, the former president, whose international business connections posed potential conflicts of interests.

Napolitano, too, must resign her current job as a border state governor. She was among the earliest Obama supporters, when Clinton seemed the likely Democratic nominee.

Gates' appointment fulfilled a campaign promise by Obama, the naming of a Republican to his Cabinet.

Holder, a former Justice Department official in the Clinton administration, led Obama's vice presidential search, while Rice was his top foreign policy adviser. Jones, meanwhile, advised both Obama and Republican presidential nominee John McCain during the campaign on national security issues. Last year he led a commission that advised Congress on progress in training Iraqi security forces.

Clinton, Holder, Napolitano and Rice require Senate confirmation. Jones, as a White House official, does not. Nor does Gates, already confirmed to his post.

Rice says she won't give Clinton too much advice--By ANNE GEARAN, AP Military Writer

Happily contemplating another woman as the top U.S. diplomat, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Monday she will offer advice, privately, and then get out of the way.

"She won't — and you won't — hear from me again," Rice said on the day President-elect Barack Obama named Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton to be the next secretary of state. "I will certainly not make the effort to comment on everything that is done."

Rice, in London on a farewell tour, said there's a lot to recommend the U.S. system of four-year presidential terms, and thus relatively short tours of duty for Cabinet ministers.

"You'll be a very hard act to follow," British Foreign Secretary David Miliband told her.

Rice also noted that Clinton would be the third woman among the last four people to be U.S. secretary of state. That fourth occupant of the job, Colin Powell, "was a black man, so white men are trailing pretty badly," Rice said. The third woman, Madeleine Albright, served during the administration of Clinton's husband, former President Bill Clinton.

The job is one of the most visible in the world, a distinction Rice has clearly enjoyed but also found confining.

"I am very fond of her, I think she has worked very hard on behalf of the country, I think she really comported herself well in the (Democratic presidential) campaign," Rice said of Clinton, who lost a tense nominating contest to Obama earlier this year.

Rice spoke to Clinton before she left Washington on Sunday, her spokesman said. Rice briefed Clinton on the aftermath of a terrorist rampage in India that has forced Rice to rearrange what had been planned as a low-stress European valedictory for a diplomat much better liked in European capitals than her boss.

Rice is scrapping much of the trip, including an evening in Rome, and flying to India to express direct U.S. condolences for the deaths of more than 170 people.

Obama did not announce his national security Cabinet until Monday, but Clinton had been the presumptive choice for weeks.

"She possesses an extraordinary intelligence and toughness, and a remarkable work ethic," Obama said in making it official. "She is an American of tremendous stature who will have my complete confidence, who knows many of the world's leaders, who will command respect in every capital and who will clearly have the ability to advance our interests around the world."
Clinton's nomination as secretary of state is another milestone for a former first lady who was the first to win elective office, the first to run for president herself and now the first to be chosen for a Cabinet position.

"I know that she will bring enormous energy and intellect and skill to the position," Rice told reporters in London. "Most important, I know her to be somebody who has what you need most in this job, which is a deep love for the United States of America and for its values, respect for differences that we may have with friends and allies, but always recognizing that the core of who we are as Americans unites us with very many around the world, particularly Great Britain," Rice said.

Rice's two-day London visit is almost certainly her last as secretary, and closes a circle begun with her first trip abroad shortly after taking the job in 2005. She made London her first stop on a European get-acquainted tour that was intended to turn the page on bad blood between the Bush administration and European allies angry about the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

Things did get better, and Rice cooperated with European powers on several diplomatic projects.

The Bush administration counts the evolution of Kosovo into an independent nation as one success story, and cooperation with European powers on Iran another. Rice dropped the Bush administration's previous bans on negotiations with Iran in hopes of coaxing the regime to back down on its nuclear program. That hasn't worked, but Rice got points with formerly quarrelsome allies for trying.

Rice has more goodbyes Tuesday in Brussels, where she sees NATO allies. The United States has a long-standing beef with some NATO nations over reluctance to send large numbers of fighting forces to Afghanistan, but the dispute has been cordial. The same is true for an emerging difference over engagement with Russia following last summer's war with Georgia.

The United States wants to take any cooperation with Russia very slowly, and to avoid overtly military partnerships.

330 - From Pickin’ Cotton to Pickin’ Presidents

Both these maps show the same segment of the southern United States, and demonstrate a similar pattern. Yet each describes a wholly other era and a completely different process.

The bottom map dates from 1860 (i.e. the eve of the Civil War), and indicates where cotton was produced at that time, each dot representing 2,000 bales of the stuff. Cotton was King back then, and mainly so in the densely cultivated border area between Louisiana and Mississippi, and in an equally dense band of cotton cultivation starting west of the Mississippi-Alabama line, tapering out across Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina. Other cotton centres are the areas around Memphis and what appears to be Lawrenceburg in southern Tennessee.

The top map dates from 2008, and shows the results of the recent presidential election, on county level. Blue counties voted for Obama, red ones for McCain (darker hues representing larger majorities). In spite of Obama’s national victory, and barring Virginia, North Carolina and Florida, all Southern states (i.e. all states formerly belonging to the Confederacy) went for McCain. The pattern of pro-Obama counties in those southern states corresponds strikingly with the cotton-picking areas of the 1860s, especially along the Louisiana-Mississippi and Mississippi-Alabama borders (the pattern corresponds less strikingly and deviates significantly elsewhere).

The link between these two maps is not causal, but correlational, and the correlation is African-Americans. Once they were the slaves on whom the cotton economy had to rely for harvesting. Despite an outward migration towards the Northern cities, their settlement pattern now still closely corresponds to that of those days.
During the Democratic primary, many African-American voters supported Hillary Clinton, thinking it unlikely Barack Obama would win the nomination, let alone the presidency. When it became apparent that Obama had a good shot at the nomination (and thereafter at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue itself), their support for Obama became near monolithic. As it turns out, president-elect Obama won with the an overall support of 53%, but that includes over 90% of black voters (1).

And while their votes did not swing their states towards ‘their’ (2) candidate, the measure in which black residents of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama and South Carolina voted for Obama is remarkable in that this particular voting pattern still corresponds with settlement patterns of almost a century and a half ago.
.
Many thanks to Paul Downey for sending in this map, found here.
.
UPDATE #1: I received an overlay of both maps from Mark Root-Wiley: “The borders do not line up perfectly but came closer than I thought they would. The top layer had to be made semitransparent in order to see the blue vs. red breakdown in Arkansas/Lousiana/Mississippi, but I think it’s pretty useful. The correlation was even stronger than I thought.” It looks great. Thanks, Mark!

UPDATE #2: The original juxtaposition of the two maps was the work of Allen Gathman (explained here, and done here).

UPDATE #3: In comment #96, C. Neal explains how the voting pattern can be related to even more antique antecedents than Antebellum agriculture - the Late Cretaceous Period, no less. Go to the comment for link to the post…

(1) Of white voters, only 43% voted for Obama; since Lyndon B. Johnson, no Democratic candidate for the highest office has ever garnered more than half the votes of European-Americans.

(2) Obama self-identifies as black, but with a white mother and a Kenyan father, shares no personal, historical bond with the issue of black slavery in the US

The ghost of cotton: How vanished plantations still shape American voting--By Sasha Issenberg

BARACK OBAMA'S WINNING map asserted the political dominance of a new, dynamic America, as he flipped blue some of the country's youngest, most diverse, and fastest-growing areas. Yet in the Deep South, the one region where Obama failed to win a state, there is little evidence of that demographic churn. Its political behavior seems tied more closely to antebellum industry than to any of the social changes the country has undergone since.

The accompanying map shows that even this year, cotton remains kingmaker: The map of Obama's Southern voters is strikingly similar to the historical map of cotton production circa 1860, on the eve of the Civil War (a phenomenon pointed out by blogger Allen Gathman).

That skein of support echoes the Black Belt, initially named for the dark fertile soil in which cotton could thrive. The onetime seats of Southern plantation culture are still home, especially in Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana, to some of the region's largest black populations - the descendants of slaves who became Obama's Southern base. (When African-American political successes are heralded as the "first since Reconstruction," it is because of a brief post-Civil War assertion of black political power in these places.)

"So far as I can learn, the term was first used to designate a part of the country which was distinguished by the colour of the soil," Booker T. Washington wrote of the Black Belt in 1901. "Later, and especially since the war, the term seems to be used wholly in a political sense - that is, to designate the counties where the black people outnumber the white."

Nineteenth-century settlement had its spectral fingerprints elsewhere in Obama's victory: It was in something of a White Belt that he won his party's nomination. The flip side of Obama's poor showing in the Deep South is his strong performance among white Democrats in places that were barely settled while slavery was legal. Obama's biggest margins of the nominating season, after all, came in Idaho, Alaska, and Kansas. These states have one thing in common: They entered the union after the Civil War.

Sasha Issenberg is a reporter in the Globe's Washington bureau and the author of "The Sushi Economy: Globalization and the Making of a Modern Delicacy."

Roots of Defeat--Let us study, and emulate, the Left’s online tactics By: PATRICK RUFFINI

The four-year ascent of Barack Obama from state senator to president marks not just the triumph of a man, but the coming of age of a movement.

That movement belongs to liberal (or “progressive”) Democrats, who in less than a decade have remade themselves. Once respected only in academia and the news media, they have become a fighting force. They systemically digitized the means of political organization and strategy, with the ultimate goal of dominating the political system — “Crush their spirits!” was Daily Kos blogger Markos Moulitsas Zuniga’s pre-election rallying cry.

The Left’s online movement is consciously modeled after the Goldwater-and- Reagan-era conservative movement. To those trying to build the Left, the vast right-wing conspiracy was an object not of scorn, but of admiration. They studied the Right’s network of think tanks, issue groups, and talk-show hosts, looking for clues on how to push a message with brutal efficiency. They took these lessons to heart and shaped them to fit the web. Ironically, today’s Right has much to learn from them.

The Left has created not just a collection of unshaven bloggers but a machine that beat the Right at its own game. The Left’s response to idea mills like the Heritage Foundation and AEI is the Center for American Progress, except that it produces few ideas: A reported 40 percent of its budget is given over to marketing. The tip of the spear is ThinkProgress. org, a site written ostensibly by CAP policy wonks. Its sole function seems to be to discredit conservative candidates and personalities; it contains 11,000 pages with the words “Sarah Palin” on them, according to Google. ThinkProgress entries aren’t all that original, but they frequently serve as jumping-off points for the left-wing blogosphere and Countdown with Keith Olbermann.

If ThinkProgress is the framing and messaging arm of the netroots, Talking Points Memo’s Josh Marshall is its resident opposition researcher. When he began blogging eight years ago, Marshall seemed like a classic starving-artist type, bouncing around from freelance gig to freelance gig and blogging in his spare time. But Marshall has become the Left’s most consistently high-performing purveyor of new attack memes against Republicans and conservatives. He has built a small empire — TPM Media employs seven reporter-bloggers, and one former employee landed at ABC News.

Daily Kos ’s Moulitsas is in many ways the central fixture of the liberal blog scene, and activism is his main focus. Moulitsas has pushed his many readers — he receives tens of millions of page views a month — to donate to his favorite candidates, usually second-tier liberal challengers to comfortable Republican incumbents. Daily Kos is not merely a platform for liberal views, but an instrument for building political support in and for the Democratic party. “[Daily Kos is] a Democratic blog with one goal in mind: electoral victory,” wrote Moulitsas in a defining 2004 post. “The battle for the party is not an ideological battle. It’s one between establishment and anti-establishment factions.”

The netroots’ early successes were achieved over the opposition of the party establishment and with little support from major donors.But the Democratic fundraising clearinghouse ActBlue changed the game:Any donor could earmark money for specific candidates, and could do so online. The site has now raised nearly $82 million for Democratic candidates, most of them liberal.

Over the years, liberal bloggers have seen numerous victories. Their baptism in the political arena was the 2004 Howard Dean campaign, when the Internet allowed a little-known former Vermont governor to eclipse his more recognizable but milquetoast competitors. The candidate blew it at the eleventh hour, but the experience was instructional. In the ensuing years, a powerful assist from the blogosphere stiffened the spines of traditional Democratic interest groups, which had been ineffective in the first Bush term.

In 2005, Marshall led the liberal blogosphere’s charge against Social Security reform; he posted the names and phone numbers of Democratic politicians who professed openness to private accounts, dubbing them the “faint-hearted faction.” As the phone calls rolled in, the faint-hearted changed their positions one by one. That, coupled with the Republican leadership’s offering only weak-kneed support, dealt a decisive blow to the president’s signature second-term initiative, puncturing his aura of invincibility and presaging the death spiral to come.

In 2006, there was no civil war between the Deaniac netroots, whose leader now headed the Democratic National Committee, and the party establishment. Everyone marched under the banner of the netroots’ in-your-face aggressiveness. YouTube played a decisive role in fanning the flames of George Allen’s verbal foibles — forever enshrining the “macaca moment” — and thus flipped control of the U.S. Senate.

Shortly thereafter came Marshall ’s greatest triumph, the result of cobbling together local news accounts of U.S. attorney firings around the country. He wove them into a single narrative about cronyism at the Justice Department that eventually cost Alberto Gonzales his job. It was a story uniquely suited to the Internet: No reporter was covering that beat, and the local articles were accessible to everyone online.

In 2007, out of this vibrant, drama-filled history, came the Obama campaign, which concluded that the Internet could make the difference in an insurgent primary bid against Hillary Clinton. To be sure, the crowds and the gusher of online money would not have materialized without Obama’s charisma. But the campaign came up with brilliant tactics and executed them perfectly, requiring supporters to give their e-mail addresses (for subsequent re-solicitation) to attend rallies, collecting an estimated 3 million cellphone numbers by promising to announce the vice-presidential pick by text message, and hiring an nine-person online video team to craft the candidate’s image on YouTube.

Without Obama’s massive online fundraising haul, the Illinois senator likely would not have had the resources to dominate the ground-game- intensive caucus states that made the difference in his nomination. And though money and tactics alone cannot explain the general-election outcome, the Internet gave Obama the freedom to opt out of public financing, setting up the most one-sided air and ground campaigns in modern presidential politics.

Meanwhile, the Right isn’t even out of the gate in mobilizing money and activists for its candidates outside the traditional party structure. Republicans have replicated the ActBlue technology, but their success has been limited by a distinctly inhospitable environment. Right-of-center bloggers are disinclined to engage in direct activism, and campaign consultants who came of age in the 20th century are reluctant to invest resources in the Internet.

Another problem is that conservative bloggers are there to provide you with their opinion. The new pillars of left-wing media are there to provide you with information, such as that on the U.S. attorney firings. Recognizing that page A1 of any newspaper usually trumps the op-ed page in setting the agenda, these outlets have fashioned themselves as dispensers of information — information usually helpful to the Left and its candidates.

This is because TPM, ThinkProgress, and the Huffington Post are all full-time operations employing reporters, whereas conservative blogs usually run the work of amateur or part-time writers. When conservative bloggers are full-time, they are generally commentators and not reporters.

It goes without saying that Republicans’ problems go far beyond their use — or relative non-use — of technology. The netroots and the Obama campaign succeeded primarily because the Internet is a medium tailor-made for insurgents. But now that Republicans are on the outs at all levels of government, they will need the Internet as a tool of opposition. Failure to grab hold of it could signal a long, long winter to come.

Mr. Ruffini is a Republican political strategist and co-founder of TheNextRight.com.

What Obama Really Means for Black America and Beyond by Celeste Watkins-Hayes

"The soon-to-be first family presents a potent role model. Here, the author, a sociologist and African American Studies assistant professor at Northwestern, describes the other half of the political agenda that is essential if we are to embrace the “politics of personal responsibility.”

November 21, 2008

The global celebration of President-elect Barack Obama's victory, punctuated by the teary faces of civil rights activists such as John Lewis, represents a historic moment that almost is beyond words.

Perhaps not surprisingly, the victory, with omnipresent images of the soon-to-be first family, has re-ignited the call by political leaders and media commentators alike for African Americans to once and for all lay down the burden of “black victimhood.” Barack and Michelle are held up in the media as role models for a black community that has witnessed black families struggle and all too often falter.

Prescribed for decades in the black community, personal responsibility and community efficacy are being pushed in the context of what Barack Obama accomplished. The message: stay in school, work hard, and build strong families. By playing by the rules, you will earn your place among the prosperous and powerful.

This point of view has value, but something crucial is missing from the analyses of the newly emboldened purveyors of personal responsibility who argue that blacks must step up now and make changes.

“Stepping up” to the example that the Obamas have set as role models can only be realized if government and corporate interests meet individuals halfway. A call to value education is difficult to embrace in failing schools. A challenge to leave the street corner is less enticing when no jobs await you and the home you return to is dilapidated. And a plea to parent your children is much harder to heed without the support of a living wage, health care and a safe neighborhood.

Can progressive politics be married to the politics of personal responsibility?

Personal responsibility is now verboten in some circles, associated with the limitations of 1996 welfare reform and the public attacks that the black poor have endured from black and white observers. The term must be reclaimed and coupled with a political agenda that empowers rather than degrades marginalized groups.

The millions of newly registered voters living in disadvantaged communities should be encouraged to seize this moment to work together and improve the world around them. But placing the burden for progress solely on the shoulders of the disadvantaged ignores the historical wrongs and present-day environmental barriers that systematically confine their economic mobility: residential segregation, substandard schools, limited work opportunities and a tattered social safety net that often fails to help them weather the hardest of times or guarantee basics such as health care.

Obama’s keen political instincts and in-depth understanding of the relationship between economic instability and race, gained from his years as a community organizer, suggest that he gets this. But he also needs us as a nation to remain aware and committed to addressing the sober realities of poverty and racism that still haunt us. It takes a media willing to investigate the barriers that halt the progress of many and journalistic advocates ready to explore solutions. It doesn’t make sense to lecture disadvantaged communities to embrace personal and collective efficacy without supporting policies that break down the serious obstacles to such success.

Can we lift up Obama as a role model for black achievement while getting behind a policy agenda that addresses many of the entrenched economic disparities that are causes and consequences of black strife?

The recent conversation about the historical and social significance of Obama’s victory has largely taken place apart from the discussion of the three issues that will likely dominate the policy agenda during his term: the current economic crisis, the health care system and the nation’s reliance of foreign oil.

These massive projects can provide political cover to ignore those at the bottom of the economic and social ladder in favor of targeting the voter-rich middle class. Or they can offer a political opening to pursue opportunities that allow more low-income and working class Americans—a disproportionate number of who are racial and ethnic minorities—to enter the middle class as the president-elect attempts to lift all boats.

The fundamental question for Obama’s domestic agenda will be: Just who lives on the Main Street that he has signaled as his priority, and can those of low socioeconomic status call it home along with the rest of Americans?

We must harness the hopefulness and collective commitment fashioned by this watershed moment in the life of our country for Americans most in need of hope. With each reach up the economic ladder, all Americans should be met by an administration and a public willing to extend its grasp in return.

President-Elect Barack Obama & The Potential to Strengthen the National AIDS Responce

An Open Letter from Phill Wilson, CEO, Black AIDS Institute On the Election of President-Elect Barack Obama & The Potential to Strengthen the National AIDS Response

December 1, 2008

Today is World AIDS day and I'm thinking about President-elect Barack Obama. As a 52-year-old Black gay man with HIV, I have many reasons to welcome the inauguration of Barack Obama. A big one is that an Obama administration has enormous potential to reinvigorate a struggle that has been allowed to flag over the last eight years: our national fight against HIV/AIDS.

With our country facing so many national challenges - two wars, a financial meltdown, and the growing threat of environmental devastation - it may be tempting to relegate the AIDS epidemic to the lower rung of national priorities. Yet that would be a grave mistake. Every year, more than 56,000 people in this country contract HIV.

The devastation is worst among Black Americans, who represent nearly half of all new HIV infections, including two-thirds of the new cases among women and 70% of the new cases among adolescents.

AIDS clearly has affected certain groups more than others. But as Senator Obama said in 2006: "We are all sick because of AIDS - and we are all tested by this crisis. It is a test not only of our willingness to respond, but of our ability to look past the artificial divisions and debates that have often shaped that response."

AIDS, in short, is a sickness at the very heart of the American family. Like any family, America must respond to the sickness in its midst by displaying both solidarity for those who are living with HIV and a determination to make sure no one else gets infected.

We cannot relegate the AIDS fight to the government alone, not even with President Obama at the helm. So, here are several high-priority actions that Americans and our new government, together, should immediately take to reinvigorate our fight against HIV/AIDS:

Support efforts to develop a National AIDS Strategy
The U.S. government requires all foreign countries that receive assistance from the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) to have a national strategy to respond to HIV/AIDS.

Shockingly, America has no national strategy for its own epidemic. No national targets are in place for reducing the number of new HIV infections or lowering the annual number of AIDS deaths. Multiple federal agencies own different pieces of the national AIDS response, yet in the absence of any national coordinating mechanism they stumble over each other, fight for turf, and leave critical priorities unaddressed.

President-elect Obama has committed to put in place a National AIDS Strategy. However, communities affected by AIDS - not bureaucrats -- must drive the development of this strategy.
Partner with the Obama administration to strengthen HIV prevention
HIV prevention accounts for a paltry 4% of total spending by the federal government on domestic HIV/AIDS programs. That's an outrage.

The Obama administration must make good on its campaign promise to strengthen national prevention efforts. Yet when opposition surfaces to needle exchange or school-based HIV prevention programs, we must speak out and persuade decision-makers that true "family values" don't allow more HIV infections to occur when proven methods exist to prevent them.

The disproportionate vulnerability of Black gay men to HIV infection stems in no small part from the prevailing stigma associated with homosexuality. If we are serious about lowering the rate of new HIV infections, we must actively oppose stigma and promote acceptance in our churches, schools, and local communities.

Make knowledge of HIV status a universal community norm
The CDC estimates that more than one in five people living with HIV don't know they are infected. Such people are often diagnosed late in the course of disease, which significantly reduces life expectancy. Late HIV testing also contributes to the spread of HIV, because people who are unaware of their infection are more than three times more likely to expose others to the virus as people who know they are HIV-positive. Here, too, our new President will need our help establish a social norm that every person should know his or her HIV status. We need to urge everyone to get tested, and to explain, again and again, the benefits of getting tested.

Deliver treatments to those who need them
In 2006, 15,000 Americans died of HIV-related causes. Yet, while our government's global AIDS efforts enjoyed double-digit increases each year between 2005 and 2008, categorical domestic federal programs for HIV treatment and prevention failed to keep pace with inflation.

Especially scandalous is the lack of any funding increase for the Minority AIDS Initiative since 2004, even though nearly 100,000 Black Americans have become newly infected with HIV since that year. We need to insist that Congressional appropriators deliver the funding that is urgently needed to address this national priority.

Build community capacity on AIDS
Throughout much of the HIV/AIDS epidemic, mainstream Black organizations stayed on the sidelines. Thankfully, that has changed. Organizations like the Black AIDS Institute, the Balm in Gilead and the National Black Leadership Commission on AIDS have assisted leading Black organizations and historically Black colleges and universities to develop organizational action plans on AIDS.

Unfortunately, we're still not where we need to be. In 2006, private U.S.-based foundations gave less than a tenth of their HIV-related contributions to activities in this country. Less than a tenth! While we continue to help Africa and other hard-hit regions, we need to put out the fire here at home.

The new administration offers enormous promise for a new day in our nation's long struggle against HIV/AIDS. However, President Obama and his team won't be able to reinvigorate the national AIDS response on their own. Let's roll up our sleeves and get to work.

Yes, we can!

Yours in the Struggle,

Phill Wilson
phillwilson@blackaids.org

Black AIDS Institute
1833 W. 78th St.
Ste. 200

Los Angeles, CA. 90057-4257

213-353-3610

info@blackaids.org
http://www.blackaids.org

Rep. Jackson is our choice to be senator

U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. is our choice to be the next U.S. senator from Illinois.

Though Gov. Blagojevich, who must pick a replacement in the Senate for President-elect Barack Obama, finds himself with no shortage of qualified candidates, we believe Jackson has earned the job and would serve our state -- our entire state -- well.

And if Jackson does not, he'll get bounced soon enough. Once appointed, he would have to stand for election statewide in less than two years, where his famous name would be as much a burden as a blessing.

We believe Jackson, 43, has the drive, the passion and the experience. In his 13 years in Congress, he has distinguished himself as a thoughtful, committed legislator who fights for what he thinks is right.

Jackson took the lead in the push for a third Chicago area airport -- in Will County, close to his South Side and south suburban district -- and has refused to give up. That has put him at odds with Mayor Daley, a man he would be smart to befriend, but we admire his commitment on this issue, as well as his daily determination to bring economic development to his depressed district.

Jackson has looked after his constituents well, bringing home about $600 million in federal grants and appropriations for projects such as fresh drinking water in Ford Heights, a community long stuck with rust-colored, foul-smelling water. He has led efforts to redevelop the former US Steel South Works site on the South Side.

Jackson also has proven himself on the national stage, serving on the House Appropriations Committee and as Obama's national campaign co-chairman. He has pushed for universal health care and, in 2001, was the point man on legislation that created a center on minority health and health disparities at the National Institutes of Health.

Above all, we believe, Jackson shares the values and goals of the president-elect, a consideration of no small importance to us in making this endorsement. The voters of Illinois chose Obama twice -- first for the Senate and then for president -- and they deserve a replacement who fully shares the president-elect's agenda.

Jackson at times reminds us more of the consensus-inclined Obama, seeking to rise above race and factionalism, than his honorable but more divisive father, the Rev. Jesse Jackson. The son has even called out the father when he felt it necessary. Back in July, when the Rev. Jackson was caught whispering a rather ungentlemanly comment about Obama -- something, as we recall, about snipping Obama's manhood -- Rep. Jackson played it straight, saying he was "outraged and disappointed'' by his father's "reckless" mutterings.

This newspaper has respect for both Jesse Jacksons -- the son and the father -- and in the son we see many of the father's finest qualities, in particular a passion for championing the poor, the oppressed and the powerless.

But in Rep. Jackson, we also see somebody who is his own man.

We cannot conclude this editorial without mentioning one other superbly qualified candidate for the job, Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan. She is an independent and highly effective leader and would make a terrific senator.

But we doubt Blagojevich would offer her the appointment, given that she is the daughter of his Springfield nemesis, House Speaker Mike Madigan. And we doubt Lisa Madigan would accept the appointment, given her obvious interest in running for governor in 2010.

More to the point, we are fully enthusiastic about the prospect of a Sen. Jesse Jackson Jr. -- oh, how far we have come -- and we urge the governor to make it happen.