What You May Have Missed About the Obama Inauguration

Amid all the hubbub, here are 2 things I wanted to highlight:

Those Peruvian shamans were once again sending their energy our way on Tuesday! I love these guys. This time, however, they gathered fellow shamans from Mexico, Brazil and Bolivia to participate in an ancient Andean ritual to protect Obama, give him strength and help him usher in peace worldwide. According to the report, the shamans danced, shook rattles, blew smoke and tossed flower petals and coca leaves at a photo of Obama (I'm sure the conservatives just LOVE the coca leaf ingredient). Thanks guys--we appreciate the support!

Did you love Obama's speech? It was great, but I had one problem with it. About halfway through he said:

"...We will work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat, and roll back the specter of a warming planet. We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents ..."

I really have a problem with the "We will not apologize for our way of life." Or maybe I'm just confused. On one hand, Obama delivered a rousing rebuke to America's enemies, which rallied the crowd. I admit it even got me a little worked up. But it's such a vague phrase, that everyone can ascribe to it whatever they want. But what did Obama mean, "our way of life?"

Was he talking about a free press, free elections, equality and opportunity? Well, that's certainly worth defending. Or did he mean our tendency to guzzle gas, bully our way with other economies and the planet, and generally pressure everyone to be just like us? Well, that I do feel we should apologize for. Because it's that way of life that frequently has caused us to sacrifice our higher ideals in favor of the almighty dollar. And that's why we're the No. 1 target of terrorists today.

Maybe it isn't anything to worry about. But Obama and his speech writers carefully crafted each and every word of that speech. The cynic in me says he put that in there to appease the conservatives, those who fear Obama will somehow surrender American prestige and power.

I dunno, but to me, a way of life isn't necessarily good or bad. Yet we Americans frequently tell others they must change their way of life and that ours is better. So--how dare we say we'll never apologize? Isn't that just arrogance? How can you negotiate and lead to a better tomorrow when the only way you see is your own?

Maybe I'm just being picky but it gives me pause.

What You May Have Missed About the Obama Inauguration

Amid all the hubbub, here are 2 things I wanted to highlight:

Those Peruvian shamans were once again sending their energy our way on Tuesday! I love these guys. This time, however, they gathered fellow shamans from Mexico, Brazil and Bolivia to participate in an ancient Andean ritual to protect Obama, give him strength and help him usher in peace worldwide. According to the report, the shamans danced, shook rattles, blew smoke and tossed flower petals and coca leaves at a photo of Obama (I'm sure the conservatives just LOVE the coca leaf ingredient). Thanks guys--we appreciate the support!

Did you love Obama's speech? It was great, but I had one problem with it. About halfway through he said:

"...We will work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat, and roll back the specter of a warming planet. We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents ..."

I really have a problem with the "We will not apologize for our way of life." Or maybe I'm just confused. On one hand, Obama delivered a rousing rebuke to America's enemies, which rallied the crowd. I admit it even got me a little worked up. But it's such a vague phrase, that everyone can ascribe to it whatever they want. But what did Obama mean, "our way of life?"

Was he talking about a free press, free elections, equality and opportunity? Well, that's certainly worth defending. Or did he mean our tendency to guzzle gas, bully our way with other economies and the planet, and generally pressure everyone to be just like us? Well, that I do feel we should apologize for. Because it's that way of life that frequently has caused us to sacrifice our higher ideals in favor of the almighty dollar. And that's why we're the No. 1 target of terrorists today.

Maybe it isn't anything to worry about. But Obama and his speech writers carefully crafted each and every word of that speech. The cynic in me says he put that in there to appease the conservatives, those who fear Obama will somehow surrender American prestige and power.

I dunno, but to me, a way of life isn't necessarily good or bad. Yet we Americans frequently tell others they must change their way of life and that ours is better. So--how dare we say we'll never apologize? Isn't that just arrogance? How can you negotiate and lead to a better tomorrow when the only way you see is your own?

Maybe I'm just being picky but it gives me pause.

Quick Rant for the Day: Israel & Gaza

I'm watching the local news, and a Jewish woman is interviewed who said she had recently lived in Israel and still has family there. She was obviously concerned about Hamas firing rockets into Israel, which triggered the recent invasion of Gaza. She's talking about the rockets and says something like, "They're firing rockets at us, and putting our families in danger."

Out of context, seems reasonable. I'd feel the same way. But she was defending Israel's invasion and, by default, the deaths of around 1,000 Palestinians!

Excuse me? So it's bad when Israeli families are in danger but ok to fire back at Palestinian families and kill them. 1,000 Palestinians dead so far--less than 20 Israelis and most of them soldiers, last I saw. This is just wrong.

And Bolivia has broken off relations with Israel because of the conflict. I know---oooooh, scary----but it's interesting to for me to see more Latin American countries taking stands on issues like this and snubbing their noses at U.S. dominance in the hemisphere.

Quick Rant for the Day: Israel & Gaza

I'm watching the local news, and a Jewish woman is interviewed who said she had recently lived in Israel and still has family there. She was obviously concerned about Hamas firing rockets into Israel, which triggered the recent invasion of Gaza. She's talking about the rockets and says something like, "They're firing rockets at us, and putting our families in danger."

Out of context, seems reasonable. I'd feel the same way. But she was defending Israel's invasion and, by default, the deaths of around 1,000 Palestinians!

Excuse me? So it's bad when Israeli families are in danger but ok to fire back at Palestinian families and kill them. 1,000 Palestinians dead so far--less than 20 Israelis and most of them soldiers, last I saw. This is just wrong.

And Bolivia has broken off relations with Israel because of the conflict. I know---oooooh, scary----but it's interesting to for me to see more Latin American countries taking stands on issues like this and snubbing their noses at U.S. dominance in the hemisphere.

Peruvian Shamans Send Good Vibes to Obama--and Michael Jackson

Interesting little tidbit. Seems a group of Peruvian shamans are blessing Obama and others in their regular rituals. The story says the shamans went to the highest point in Lima for the cleansing ritual, which included blessings not only on Obama but also Bolivian President Evo Morales, Cuban President Fidel Castro, among others, including the King of Pop Michael Jackson.

You can watch a video of the actual ritual here.

Of course, I'm intrigued, but upon seeing the video, it all looks a bit staged. But these so-called shamans have done this before. Before the recent U.S. election, they held a ritual to bless both Obama and McCain so that the best candidate would win. At least they're nonpartisan shamans.

But who am I to judge? As long as they're sincere, fine with me. We need all the help we can get! (I'm sure Michael does, too.)

Peruvian Shamans Send Good Vibes to Obama--and Michael Jackson

Interesting little tidbit. Seems a group of Peruvian shamans are blessing Obama and others in their regular rituals. The story says the shamans went to the highest point in Lima for the cleansing ritual, which included blessings not only on Obama but also Bolivian President Evo Morales, Cuban President Fidel Castro, among others, including the King of Pop Michael Jackson.

You can watch a video of the actual ritual here.

Of course, I'm intrigued, but upon seeing the video, it all looks a bit staged. But these so-called shamans have done this before. Before the recent U.S. election, they held a ritual to bless both Obama and McCain so that the best candidate would win. At least they're nonpartisan shamans.

But who am I to judge? As long as they're sincere, fine with me. We need all the help we can get! (I'm sure Michael does, too.)

Peace Corps Yanked Out of Bolivia

A view of Bolivia's capital La Paz

Tracking news from Bolivia ever since it expelled the U.S. ambassador has been difficult. But the latest is that the U.S. has pulled out all 113 Peace Corps volunteers from the country, saying the situation there is too dangerous as a result of clashes between Morales' government and opposition groups. Volunteers, of course, are upset to leave projects undone, and some say there is no threat to Americans.

PC volunteers say they can't believe this is happening--but, excuse me, isn't the PC an arm of the U.S. government? Sure, it does great things. I have 2 friends who are former volunteers, and I toyed with the idea myself. But there are restrictions on what volunteers can and cannot do, per the U.S. government--so no surprise, really, that we would be pulling out. Bolivia has even accused the PC in the past of spying for the U.S. government. So, yeah, we're taking our toys and going home.

The Bush administration is also close to cutting trade benefits to Bolivia as a result of recent actions by Morales. This seems to mostly involve allowing Bolivia to import its goods into the U.S. duty-free. Last I could tell, the bill had yet to be approved by both houses of Congress.

These benefits are also dependent on how Latin American countries cooperate with the DEA on anti-drug efforts. Morales isn't helping matters by recently refusing to allow DEA surveillance flights over Bolivia.

I'm really curious to see how this plays out and how it will change our relationship with Latin America. In the meantime, Bolivia's neighbors are standing behind the Morales government and against the more U.S.-friendly opposition forces.

Stay tuned!

Peace Corps Yanked Out of Bolivia

A view of Bolivia's capital La Paz

Tracking news from Bolivia ever since it expelled the U.S. ambassador has been difficult. But the latest is that the U.S. has pulled out all 113 Peace Corps volunteers from the country, saying the situation there is too dangerous as a result of clashes between Morales' government and opposition groups. Volunteers, of course, are upset to leave projects undone, and some say there is no threat to Americans.

PC volunteers say they can't believe this is happening--but, excuse me, isn't the PC an arm of the U.S. government? Sure, it does great things. I have 2 friends who are former volunteers, and I toyed with the idea myself. But there are restrictions on what volunteers can and cannot do, per the U.S. government--so no surprise, really, that we would be pulling out. Bolivia has even accused the PC in the past of spying for the U.S. government. So, yeah, we're taking our toys and going home.

The Bush administration is also close to cutting trade benefits to Bolivia as a result of recent actions by Morales. This seems to mostly involve allowing Bolivia to import its goods into the U.S. duty-free. Last I could tell, the bill had yet to be approved by both houses of Congress.

These benefits are also dependent on how Latin American countries cooperate with the DEA on anti-drug efforts. Morales isn't helping matters by recently refusing to allow DEA surveillance flights over Bolivia.

I'm really curious to see how this plays out and how it will change our relationship with Latin America. In the meantime, Bolivia's neighbors are standing behind the Morales government and against the more U.S.-friendly opposition forces.

Stay tuned!

More Insight Into Possible U.S. Role in Bolivian Crisis

At left is Bolivian president Evo Morales, receiving a Pre-Incan ceremonial blessing from indigenous wise men upon his election in 2006.

A bit more info on my post from last week on the unrest in Bolivia. You may wonder why I'm even interested in a small, poor South American country. Well, the history of the U.S. government's influence in this hemisphere isn't a good one. And it's our tax dollars that make all that possible. Think about that for a minute. Whether you agree with the tactics or not, "we the people" are responsible for the actions of our government. We claim to be a democracy, so therefore, the responsibility ultimately lies with every single one of us.

So, today's NY Times included a nugget of additional info, saying that Bolivian prez Evo Morales expelled our ambassador in part because he was suspicious that we might be encouraging his opponents. Specifically, this has to do with a U.S. agency called the Office of Transition Initiatives.

According to the Times, the U.S. ended the agency's operations there in 2007, which included "dispensing grants aimed at strengthening departmental [regional] governments, which have taken the lead in opposing Mr. Morales."

Hmm, so, we were giving money to local leaders in Bolivia who just happened to be opposed to Morales. These groups are of white European descent, while Morales in of indigenous origin. And these leaders were mostly once in power--and now they're not. Doesn't look at all suspicious!

Imagine if say, Iran's president were providing "grants" to secessionist groups in the U.S. Imagine how that might look to us.

Of course, our government denies anything improper. To see what the Office of Transition Initiatives officially does, here's a link to the official site.

For a completely different perspective on the agency's work, check out this site from a group in Canada.

It appears the next step is the U.S. will cut some of the $100 million a year that it gives Bolivia in aid and we may slap duties on Bolivian imports like textiles. And maybe that's all fair in love and war. But seriously, this is Bolivia--are they a threat to our national security?

Oh right--the drug/cocaine thing. Drugs are bad, I forget. Well, seeing as plenty of Americans are creating the demand for cocaine, I think we need more attention of our end of the problem instead of spazzing out over what Bolivia is doing.

We have much bigger concerns right now.

And I hope Bolivia can hold it together.

More Insight Into Possible U.S. Role in Bolivian Crisis

At left is Bolivian president Evo Morales, receiving a Pre-Incan ceremonial blessing from indigenous wise men upon his election in 2006.

A bit more info on my post from last week on the unrest in Bolivia. You may wonder why I'm even interested in a small, poor South American country. Well, the history of the U.S. government's influence in this hemisphere isn't a good one. And it's our tax dollars that make all that possible. Think about that for a minute. Whether you agree with the tactics or not, "we the people" are responsible for the actions of our government. We claim to be a democracy, so therefore, the responsibility ultimately lies with every single one of us.

So, today's NY Times included a nugget of additional info, saying that Bolivian prez Evo Morales expelled our ambassador in part because he was suspicious that we might be encouraging his opponents. Specifically, this has to do with a U.S. agency called the Office of Transition Initiatives.

According to the Times, the U.S. ended the agency's operations there in 2007, which included "dispensing grants aimed at strengthening departmental [regional] governments, which have taken the lead in opposing Mr. Morales."

Hmm, so, we were giving money to local leaders in Bolivia who just happened to be opposed to Morales. These groups are of white European descent, while Morales in of indigenous origin. And these leaders were mostly once in power--and now they're not. Doesn't look at all suspicious!

Imagine if say, Iran's president were providing "grants" to secessionist groups in the U.S. Imagine how that might look to us.

Of course, our government denies anything improper. To see what the Office of Transition Initiatives officially does, here's a link to the official site.

For a completely different perspective on the agency's work, check out this site from a group in Canada.

It appears the next step is the U.S. will cut some of the $100 million a year that it gives Bolivia in aid and we may slap duties on Bolivian imports like textiles. And maybe that's all fair in love and war. But seriously, this is Bolivia--are they a threat to our national security?

Oh right--the drug/cocaine thing. Drugs are bad, I forget. Well, seeing as plenty of Americans are creating the demand for cocaine, I think we need more attention of our end of the problem instead of spazzing out over what Bolivia is doing.

We have much bigger concerns right now.

And I hope Bolivia can hold it together.

Rumble in South America: What Is the U.S. Up to Now?

I'm tired of our presidential popularity contest. I'm much more interested in the craziness going on down in South America. We're talking expelled diplomats, violent protests, accusations of U.S. interference, martial law, strikes and arrests of government officials. And from this distance, it appears most of Bolivia's neighbors support president Evo Morales, much to the chagrin of the U.S.

Seems it's always about oil or gas, which is the case in Bolivia, the poorest country in South America. Morales is, to some, a crazy left-wing commie who pals around with equally crazy Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. The opposition claims Morales wants to turn Bolivia into---another Cuba! Maybe that's an insult, but when you're already the poorest country in the neighborhood, I'm sure everybody's grass is greener.

The nugget is Morales expelled our ambassador, claiming the U.S. has been supporting the opposition. Of course, we are shocked--shocked!--at such allegations. Maybe we're innocent, but there have been plenty of times in the past when we have "supported" movements without actually lifting a finger. Morales certainly has reason to be paranoid since us Yankees don't like anyone who tries to centralize gas and oil industries and, oh, empower the majority indigenous population that has been disenfranchised for centuries.

As further insult to our delicate sensibilities, Chavez kicked our ambassador out of his own country. He's been claiming for months that the U.S. was encouraging the protests in Bolivia. Now, add Ecuador and Honduras to the list of Morales supporters! Naturally, Cuba's joined the party, too.

Call me crazy, but I kinda like Morales and Chavez. They're standing up to our self-righteousness and arrogance. Other South American countries have rallied to end the violence, and Morales has started negotiations with the opposition. For way too long, the U.S. has run the show throughout this hemisphere, and I think our "good intentions" have created many of the struggles faced by that entire region today. Maybe there's nothing to the rumors, but it's clear South America doesn't trust us.

Lots of complicated issues involved, of course, and I will be interested to see how this plays out.

Here are a few interesting links:

• Take your Yankee toys and go home!
• They started it!
• Supporting the local boy
• Emergency summit in Chile
• Negotiations begin
  

Rumble in South America: What Is the U.S. Up to Now?

I'm tired of our presidential popularity contest. I'm much more interested in the craziness going on down in South America. We're talking expelled diplomats, violent protests, accusations of U.S. interference, martial law, strikes and arrests of government officials. And from this distance, it appears most of Bolivia's neighbors support president Evo Morales, much to the chagrin of the U.S.

Seems it's always about oil or gas, which is the case in Bolivia, the poorest country in South America. Morales is, to some, a crazy left-wing commie who pals around with equally crazy Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. The opposition claims Morales wants to turn Bolivia into---another Cuba! Maybe that's an insult, but when you're already the poorest country in the neighborhood, I'm sure everybody's grass is greener.

The nugget is Morales expelled our ambassador, claiming the U.S. has been supporting the opposition. Of course, we are shocked--shocked!--at such allegations. Maybe we're innocent, but there have been plenty of times in the past when we have "supported" movements without actually lifting a finger. Morales certainly has reason to be paranoid since us Yankees don't like anyone who tries to centralize gas and oil industries and, oh, empower the majority indigenous population that has been disenfranchised for centuries.

As further insult to our delicate sensibilities, Chavez kicked our ambassador out of his own country. He's been claiming for months that the U.S. was encouraging the protests in Bolivia. Now, add Ecuador and Honduras to the list of Morales supporters! Naturally, Cuba's joined the party, too.

Call me crazy, but I kinda like Morales and Chavez. They're standing up to our self-righteousness and arrogance. Other South American countries have rallied to end the violence, and Morales has started negotiations with the opposition. For way too long, the U.S. has run the show throughout this hemisphere, and I think our "good intentions" have created many of the struggles faced by that entire region today. Maybe there's nothing to the rumors, but it's clear South America doesn't trust us.

Lots of complicated issues involved, of course, and I will be interested to see how this plays out.

Here are a few interesting links:

• Take your Yankee toys and go home!
• They started it!
• Supporting the local boy
• Emergency summit in Chile
• Negotiations begin