RSS Feed MenuAs 2010 begins, it isn’t a hell of a lot different from how 2009 began, despite a new president who got elected on the promise of “change.”
The world problems that beset the new year are the ones that plagued the old year.
Barack Obama isn’t George Bush, but the problems are the same. Styles are different, results similar. Rhetoric is more upscale, apologies (deserved or fabricated) are forthcoming, but it’s still the same old, same old, for the U.S.
Consider: North Korea is still a menace that starves its people; Iran still lies about its nuclear intentions; America is still at war; Osama bin Laden is still hiding in a cave; Arabs still hate Israel; Guantanamo is still there; the recession continues, unabated.
So how is 2010 likely to unfold? None of us knows, but all of us can guess.
President Obama promises to start withdrawing American troops from Afghanistan by July 2011, so it’s a fair bet 2010 is going to be a year of intense fighting and redoubled efforts to curtail the Taliban and capture or kill Osama.
This means Canadian troops will likely be on the cutting edge. By this time next year it should be clearer whether Afghanistan can be won, or is a lost cause.
Canada’s economy will continue to improve in 2010 (thanks largely to our banking system) and the U.S. should be economically healthier, if only because Americans are the most resourceful, dynamic, undaunted people on earth.
As financial systems go, so goes the economy. In this recession, Canada is more blessed than most, because of our healthy banking system. This may be Stephen Harper’s greatest asset in what looks to be an election year.
In the U.S., Obama’s popularity is likely to continue to sag if he continues to govern by rhetoric instead of accomplishments. Instead of boosting confidence in America, he sometimes seems to undermine it.
The demoralized Republican Party will be increasingly seen as the party of hope. If they’re smart (an uncertainty) they’ll seek to harness the Sarah Palin faction with mainstream Republicans – unlike Democrats whose party is split between the leftist nutbars and moderate liberals.
In Canada, Stephen Harper is as lucky as Jean Chretien was in the 1990s with a fractured conservative opposition. Michael Ignatieff as Liberal leader is Harper’s best chance for a majority government.
Like the groundhog, Tiger Woods will emerge from seclusion to compete in a major golf tournament – and lose, because elements in the crowd will heckle him and he’ll lose his concentration as well as his temper. The Washington Capitals will make the Stanley Cup finals; Russia will win Olympic gold in hockey (Ovechkin and Malkin); the Phillies will win the World Series (Roy Halladay); Agoes will reach the Grey Cup if they hire Doug Flute as coach.
With luck, North Korea’s Kim Jong Il will join his dad in a mausoleum and his son, Kim Jong Un, will inherit a military coup. Iran’s internal civil war will drag on, unless the Israelis unite the country by attacking its nuclear sites.
Except for refugees who regard it as the safest, most desirable haven on earth, America will continue to be resented by large parts of the world. Canada will be second choice for those can’t make it to America.
sinz54 // Dec 28, 2009 at 9:28 am
Because of Bush’s dogged persistence in Iraq against most world opinion, many on the Left got a chance to regurgitate their old theory that the U.S. could sweet-talk the world into peace and cooperation if the U.S. wasn’t so “arrogant” and “militaristic.”
I hope the Left is noticing how world leaders are dealing with Obama.
Obama’s failure to reach a strong agreement at Copenhagen was largely due to Chinese intransigence. The reaction from the Left has been interesting. Friends Of The Earth reflexively blamed the U.S., without even waiting to hear the facts of what went on there. The rest of the Left has said almost nothing. Evidently it galls them to have to criticize a non-Western nation for a change–so they’re mostly keeping their mouths shut.
Venezuela’s Chavez poured out the same kind of abuse on Obama that he used to pour out on Bush. All those Leftists who supported Obama–are they rushing to his defense against Chavez’s venom? Have they denounced Chavez for the things he said about Obama? Nope.
Jeane Kirkpatrick had the Lefties pegged 30 years ago. They really do “blame America first”.
balconesfault // Dec 28, 2009 at 1:22 pm
Jeane Kirkpatrick had the Lefties pegged 30 years ago. They really do “blame America first”.
Jeane, like you Sinz, don’t get it.
It’s not “blame America first”.
It’s “don’t make the claim that America is blameless”.
China’s ability to scuttle the Copenhagen talks is largely the fault of the US – thanks to the last decade our debt to China has grown 7 times over, the only economic leverage we now have over China (aside from the threat of a ruinous credit default) is via trade policy, and even the slightest attempts by Obama to use trade policy to our benefit was met by the right with paroxysms.
Why would the left be rushing to Obama’s defense versus a tinpot hack like Chavez? Chavez is a hack, empowered for awhile by the popularity he was able to get for having fended off Bush’s attempted coup, and thanks to the rise in oil prices the extra cash flow he had for awhile. His tirades are not a threat to Obama, or to America. They certainly should have no substantive affect on our political system.
Also, the left has been burned already – denouncements of Saddam by liberals were used during the run-up to the invasion as a justification for Bush. As long as neocons are on the loose – and face it, Sinz, you’d happily slap the architects of the Iraq invasion back in charge tomorrow if that was the only way to get the Democrats out of power – there is going to be a tendency on the left to not add fuel to the bellocose fires that still burn in too many of your cohorts on the right.
Rod // Dec 28, 2009 at 3:06 pm
Mere rhetoric may be bringing him down in the polls, but it got him a Nobel prize. But then again so did Al Gore, if that tells you anything.
SpartacusIsNotDead // Dec 28, 2009 at 3:47 pm
Sinz wrote: “Friends Of The Earth reflexively blamed the U.S., without even waiting to hear the facts of what went on there. The rest of the Left has said almost nothing. Evidently it galls them to have to criticize a non-Western nation for a change–so they’re mostly keeping their mouths shut.”
Just another Pavlovian criticism of the Left from Sinz. First a criticism of a liberal faction for speaking without hearing all the facts. Then in the very next sentence, criticism of the rest of the Left for not speaking before the facts come out.
Kanzeon // Dec 28, 2009 at 5:16 pm
sinz54:
I’m trying to follow your post.
I’ve never heard of Friends of the Earth. I really have no way to evaluate whether the rest of the “left” (whoever they are), said much in opposition to Chavez’ comments or the China’s role in the climate change talks.
But how is a supposed failure to call out intransigence at Copenhagen is some way equal to blaming America for anything, especially since Copenhagen is the framework for “the left” in pushing environmental legislation through the Senate?
Who, exactly, was supposed to speak out against Chavez personally insulting the President? How did the failure to do so establish American blame for anything?
Who are these people speaking for the left by silence, and how is it that you hear them, but no one else does?
blowtorch_bob // Dec 28, 2009 at 9:06 pm
Democrats or Republicans. Obama or Bush. What’s the difference?
Re: Afghanistan: Can anybody tell me why are we supposed to care?
blowtorch_bob // Dec 28, 2009 at 9:21 pm
Regarding Canada’s banking system…Harper’s spiritual advisors -the Fraser Institute- hey, weren’t they lobbying hard to deregulate the Canadian banking system a few years ago but were rebuffed by the then Liberal government.
Peter could you investigate this. My guess is the Frasers were serving as pitchmen for a gang of Wall Street fraudsters desperate for cold hard cash to feed their bubble. They discovered there were billions in Canadian bank accounts and turned to the Frasers with orders to get the banking laws changed.
BTW get ready for a tsunami of bank bailouts in the U.S. this year.
sinz54 // Dec 29, 2009 at 3:31 pm
Kanzeon: Who, exactly, was supposed to speak out against Chavez personally insulting the President?
The Congressional Progressive Caucus?
Senator Reid?
Speaker Pelosi?
Markos Moulitas?
Just to name a few.
I was waiting to see all the “netroots” and “progressives,” who had supported Obama so fervently, rush to his defense against this Venezuelan S.O.B. who poured out the same venom against Obama that he used to pour out against Obama’s predecessors.
They haven’t said a word.
Nor have they defended Obama’s actions at Copenhagen.
Instead, with anti-American regimes deliberately lying that it was all Obama’s fault, the American Left is letting THEM make the record.
I guess they won’t even come to the defense of a liberal American president against foreign criticism. Even one whose election they supported.
They really need to get off this “Citizen Of The World” kick, and recognize that much of “the world,” led by some truly unsavory regimes, has no place for American concepts of justice, human rights, democracy, and freedom of expression. It has no place for THEM–and they need to stop accommodating those who would take all this away.