Bharat Rakshak

Mort Walker wrote:^^^ . Really shameful for a developed country.

Many who condemn U.S. hegemony also seem to demand it. There is a shift under way that they have not yet noticed -- except for an absence that they regard as an American failure. My attempt to explain it as the new normal did not always work.

Given that there is a U.S. presidential election under way, this doctrine, which has quietly emerged under Obama, appears to conflict with the views of Mitt Romney, a point I made in a previous article. My core argument on foreign policy is that reality, not presidents or policy papers, makes foreign policy. The United States has entered a period in which it must move from military domination to more subtle manipulation, and more important, allow events to take their course. This is a maturation of U.S. foreign policy, not a degradation. Most important, it is happening out of impersonal forces that will shape whoever wins the U.S. presidential election and whatever he might want. Whether he wishes to increase U.S. assertiveness out of national interest, or to protect human rights, the United States is changing the model by which it operates. Overextended, it is redesigning its operating system to focus on the essentials and accept that much of the world, unessential to the United States, will be free to evolve as it will.

Acharya wrote:

Mort Walker wrote:^^^ . Really shameful for a developed country.

Can you explain what is a 'developed' country?

Mort Walker wrote:^^^This is terrible. There have been so many recent kidnappings of children all across the US. Really shameful for a developed country.

Nandu wrote:

Mort Walker wrote:^^^This is terrible. There have been so many recent kidnappings of children all across the US. Really shameful for a developed country.

The baby has been found dead. Killed by 'family friend' who is also Indian.
http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/loc ... 75861.html

Singha wrote:given that we might get a new POTUS soon, does anyone have details on who is romney's chosen foreign policy and defence team should he be elected?

Rudradev wrote:This is not "Strategic News" but involves a family which could have been any one of ours.


http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/loc ... 95691.html


If you have any information on the abduction, please call 215-546-TIPS.

Yandamuri – Gambling Losses
Unless Yandamuri was lying to the Bankruptcy court, Yandamuri was a big-time gambler.

Yandamuri’s April 10, 2012 bankruptcy filing reveals an interesting disclosure – the young fellow had suffered gambling losses of $50,000 between March 7, 2011 and March 6, 2012 (Source: Statement of Financial Affairs, Page 3, filing signed on March 6, 2012, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Northern District of California).

That’s a huge gambling loss for a 26-year-old man.

Telugus in America are not given to spending much money.

They usually lead frugal lives and are obsessed with hoarding money.

Romney Runs as an Outsider but Makes Room for Lobbyists
By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE

They have hosted fund-raisers and raised millions of dollars for his campaign. They employed some of his top operatives after his first White House run, helped create the platform for his second bid and have deployed regularly to attack his Republican rivals on the campaign trail.

For a candidate running against the entrenched interests of Washington, Mitt Romney keeps an awful lot of lobbyists around.

His kitchen cabinet includes some of the most prominent Republican lobbyists in Washington, including Charles R. Black Jr., the chairman of Prime Policy Group and a lobbyist for Walmart and AT&T; Wayne L. Berman, who is chairman of Ogilvy Government Relations and represents Pfizer, the drug manufacturer; and Vin Weber, the managing partner for Clark & Weinstock.

At least 294 registered lobbyists donated a total of at least $401,000 to Mr. Romney through the end of 2011, according to a New York Times review of federal disclosure records, while an elite group of 16 “bundlers,” representing interests as varied as Wall Street, Microsoft and the tobacco company Altria, gathered more than $2 million worth of checks from friends and business partners for Mr. Romney’s campaign.

Other lobbyists serve on one of Mr. Romney’s policy advisory teams, have hosted fund-raisers for his campaign or have joined the many influential Republicans whose endorsements Mr. Romney’s campaign has hailed. Among them are David Wilkins, a former United States ambassador to Canada who lobbies for the Canadian oil industry, and Stephen Rademaker, a former State Department official who lobbies for the defense contractor General Dynamics.

Many of the lobbyists advising Mr. Romney, like Mr. Black and Mr. Berman, are veterans of other Republican presidential campaigns, including Senator John McCain’s four years ago.

“These are the people who have made a career at the intersection of policy and presidential campaigns,” said David A. Donnelly, executive director of Public Campaign Action Fund, which advocates for public financing of elections and tracks campaign contributions. “To the extent that Mitt Romney depends on these people, and he gets elected, it’s four more years of business as usual in Washington.”

A spokeswoman for Mr. Romney did not respond to requests for comment. In an era when K Street firms serve as holding pens for political operatives and landing pads for retired lawmakers of both parties, the profusion of lobbyists around Mr. Romney’s campaign in part reflects the growing embrace of his candidacy by the Republican establishment, including most of the party’s elite donors and dozens of members of Congress.

His supporters disputed the notion that Mr. Romney’s case against the Washington establishment was undercut by his deep ties to it.

“He does have people who respect him, like him and trust him” in Washington, said Ron Kaufman, who was a senior adviser at the public affairs firm Dutko Grayling until last year and now often travels with Mr. Romney on the campaign trail. “There’s no question of that. But it’s different from being of them — and it’s not going to affect how he will govern.”

Other Republican candidates also count lobbyists among their advisers and donors. And while President Obama does not accept campaign contributions from registered lobbyists, at least 15 of his own bundlers work at lobbying shops or Washington consulting companies but have not registered as lobbyists with the Senate. Those bundlers raised more than $5 million for Mr. Obama’s campaign through September.

Yet as Mr. Romney seeks to highlight his career as a businessman and attacks his chief Republican rivals as “creatures of Washington,” the contrast between his anti-Beltway message and the layers of lobbyists aiding his campaign can be jarring.

Speaking to reporters early Wednesday after Rick Santorum won caucuses in Colorado and Minnesota and the primary in Missouri, Mr. Romney’s senior strategist, Stuart Stevens, remarked, “I just don’t think it’s a time when people are looking to Washington to solve problems with Washington.”

Less than 48 hours later, Mr. Romney’s campaign held an elaborate “policy round table” fund-raiser at a Washington hotel, featuring panel discussions run by lobbyists and former cabinet officials or members of Congress.

James Talent, a former senator who runs the lobbying and public affairs firm Mercury Public Affairs, led a panel on infrastructure, according to an invitation. William Hansen, a former deputy secretary of education who is president of the lobbying firm Chartwell Education Group, led the education panel.

The price for attending the round table: a promise to raise $10,000 for Mr. Romney’s campaign. A photo with Mr. Romney went for $2,500, while a ticket to a general reception later in the evening was $1,000.

An invitation to the event named seven “industry finance chairs” for Mr. Romney’s campaign. They include Thomas F. Farrell II, the president of the Dominion power company and Mr. Romney’s energy industry finance chairman; Brett McMahon, an executive at one of the nation’s leading concrete subcontractors and Mr. Romney’s infrastructure finance chairman; and Patrick Durkin, a Barclays executive who is Mr. Romney’s top lobbyist-bundler and his financial industry finance chairman.

The event attracted hundreds of supporters, many of them lobbyists, and reportedly raised more than $1 million for Mr. Romney’s campaign.

While Mr. Romney’s broad positions on financial regulation, taxes, energy and other issues are shared by other Republican candidates, they have also not infrequently overlapped the interests of his advisers’ clients.

John M. Herrmann II, a co-chairman of Mr. Romney’s trade policy advisory group, is a lobbyist for Allegheny, a major steel producer whose products have figured in United States trade lawsuits against China. Mr. Romney’s platform calls for a more aggressive posture with China on trade, including more “punitive measures to deter unfair Chinese practices.”

Mr. Talent’s firm, Mercury Public Affairs, represents one of the largest coal producers in the country, Peabody Energy. That connection is not disclosed in a commentary that Mr. Talent contributed to Mr. Romney’s energy platform, which calls for increasing production of coal and oil and amending the Clean Air Act to exclude carbon dioxide from environmental regulation.

A number of Mr. Romney’s donors, including at least four of his bundlers, have lobbied for financial companies on the Dodd-Frank Act, which tightened Wall Street regulation. Mr. Romney has called for repealing the law.

They include Mr. Berman, who represents the Blackstone Group private equity firm. Blackstone’s founder, Stephen A. Schwarzman, has co-hosted major fund-raisers for Mr. Romney in New York and Palm Beach, Fla., and Blackstone employees donated at least $86,850 to Mr. Romney last year.

Mr. Weber began advising Mr. Romney on foreign policy in August. He is a lobbyist for the Council on Pakistan Relations, which has sought to protect United States aid to Pakistan as relations between the countries have soured.

In a debate in November, Mr. Romney said he wanted the United States to “bring Pakistan into the 21st century” to help the country “engage throughout the world with trade and with modernity.”

In an interview, Mr. Weber said he participated regularly in the campaign’s broad policy discussions, but “I’ve never spoken to Romney or anyone on the campaign about anything related to Pakistan.”

He suggested that Washington lobbyists — many of them with significant experience in the executive branch, on campaigns or on Capitol Hill — would continue to be an important source of advice for candidates.

“At the end of the day, this is the capital city,” said Mr. Weber. “If you want to go someplace to find expertise, it’s probably going to be in Washington. And that’s why candidates look to us — some a little less, some a little bit more.”

Singha wrote:I think all these obama is pro-poor and romney is pro-rich is all slogans and branding. They are pro-themselves and will kiss whatever constituency or cause helps them get votes like tarun gogoi moving around in a ridiculous karakul cap topped with a yasir arafat headcloth.

devesh wrote: JMTP's, TIFWIW....all other disclaimers.

Sanku wrote:

devesh wrote: JMTP's, TIFWIW....all other disclaimers.

I strongly agree devesh-ji.

And yes, all this tagging of socialist vs capitalist is all fair amount of hot air as well -- for all the hoo haa, Obama has done nothing about China (other than bow further) -- the real root behind US debt crises and has instead chosen to tilt against windmills in India.

devesh wrote:TIFWIW: fools don't become POTUS. yes, that includes Bush II. it was said that during his time at Yale, if you wanted to get something important done on campus, you went to him to figure out who to go to. he apparently knew the names of every half-significant person on campus, had the "network" to figure out where/when/how big changes would happen before they did. apparently the name-remembering capability carried into his political career. I'll try to find the video but there was a carpenter small-business owner who apparently met Bush in one of the rallies in 2000; apparently, Bush remembered his name and occupation when he again attended a rally in 2004 and got the chance to shake hands with him. the guy was shocked that POTUS had the focus and attention to remember a 1-minute meeting in a rally attended by 1000's even 4 years after it happened...

JMTP's, TIFWIW....all other disclaimers.

pentaiah wrote: More power to the cheddi wallahs

CRamS wrote:
But either way, both mollycoddle TSP which is what sickens me dem or rep.

KJoishy wrote:ArmenT, what benefit would Bush Jr get by playing dumb? I don't see any use for that.

darshhan wrote:
I have always wondered why Indian Americans never supported him in strength. But then maybe the interests of Indians and Indian-Americans are different. And the security of India is probably very low on the priority list of an average Indian-American. This is in sharp contrast to Jewish or the Chinese diaspora who do their utmost to advance Israel's and China's interests respectively.

ArmenT wrote:Besides, he got into Yale and later, Harvard's MBA program and graduated from both schools. This was all at a time when his father was still not really a political heavyweight of any sort ...