Excerpt on our economy
DAVID BROOKS, New York Times columnist: Well, I would say it's also hard to do. Most elections are referenda. And they're referenda on the record. It's very hard for an incumbent to make a choice election.
So the president is obviously going to try. He is going to have. And to some extent, you have to feel sorry for him. This is in large degree not his fault. Things are happening way beyond his control. I don't believe a president has control over a quarterly economy in any case. But the European situation is certainly not his fault. The Chinese slowdown is not his fault.
And the Europe thing cannot be underestimated. There was a study by some economists this week that, say, Greece leaves the euro peacefully. Well, that reduces growth to our 1.7. Say it brings Spain and Italy, and it as much messier. Then it is even worse. Obama has really very little control and he's sort of a victim of this myth that presidents control the economy quarter to quarter.
Excerpt on cyberwar and drones
JUDY WOODRUFF (Newshour): Meanwhile, remarkable story in The New York Times, your paper, this morning, David, about the White House being behind this massive effort to do a computer attack on Iran's nuclear program, so-called Stuxnet.
Mark, what are we to make of this?
MARK SHIELDS, syndicated columnist: I think, Judy, there are several parts to it.
I mean, first of all, it's a message that we are doing more to pursue our national security then simply putting boots on the ground and troops in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. I think it's also a message that -- to those who are urging military confrontation or invasion to Iran, that we are -- have means of disabling and certainly hurting their capacity...
(CROSSTALK)
JUDY WOODRUFF: Almost invisible means.
MARK SHIELDS: Almost invisible means.
And I think it's also, at a political level, an attempt, just as the drone story was earlier in the week, to show the president as a commander in chief, hands-on, personally engaged, personally involved, and to communicate strength.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Another New York Times story, your paper, talking about how closely the president is monitoring and making decisions on who gets hit.
DAVID BROOKS: Right.
(CROSSTALK)
DAVID BROOKS: And this latest story was -- well, this latest story was David Sanger, a forthcoming book, and remarkable story.
JUDY WOODRUFF: Right.
DAVID BROOKS: And I think President Bush pulled Obama aside before the inauguration and said, we have got these two programs, the drones, the Stuxnet. They didn't call it that. They called it Olympic Games. But here's what you should do.
And I think Obama has continued -- continued extremely aggressively. He's kind of a ruthless guy, both politically and in foreign affairs. And he has done it I think pretty well. Now, there are some clear doubts about drones and there are legitimate doubts. Should the White House have the power to essentially assassinate people?
And we, as the government most vulnerable to cyber-terrorism, because of how much we rely on computers, we are now on record as saying, yes, we have cyber-terror. We are doing it to others. And so there's double-edged swords here. Nonetheless, I think the bottom line is -- especially vis-a-vis Iran -- is that these are pretty effective programs. If you think government can't do anything, they were -- the Iranians were wondering, what is going on? Why are these things spinning weirdly out of control?
They were firing people. They thought there was something wrong with the machinery. We have people in our intelligence agencies doing something pretty impressive, I think.
MARK SHIELDS: Yes. I would just say that there are a number of people who have grave moral reservations about the over-reliance on drones, that there is something nice about it because you don't see...
(CROSSTALK)
JUDY WOODRUFF: Almost antiseptic.
MARK SHIELDS: It's antiseptic, and I don't get my -- I don't get blood or gristle on my hands. I don't see people suffer.
I think that was an attempt to show that the president is personally engaged, concerned about collateral damage, that he personally -- hasn't subcontracted this out or been indifferent or just sort of delegated. But at the same time, I think the question that asked is, who would you least want to have as president right now, and do you want that person having these powers?
No comments:
Post a Comment