Newt Gingrich really wants to be the Republican nominee for President of the United States in 2012. Undoubtedly many of you have already seen Newt's latest and seediest effort, in comments to the National Review, at whipping up Obama Fear for political gain:

"What if [Obama] is so outside our comprehension, that only if you understand Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior, can you begin to piece together [his actions]?" Newt rhetorically asked the National Review, "That is the most accurate, predictive model for his behavior.... This is a person who is fundamentally out of touch with how the world works, who happened to have played a wonderful con, as a result of which he is now president."

For a former history professor Newt seems woefully ignorant of American and world history. As to Obama's "Kenyan, anti-colonial behavior": Firstly, as Newt should know, Obama was born and has spent most of his life in the United States, not Kenya. Secondly, as Newt should also know, the United States was founded on anti-colonial behavior. The American Revolution, Revolutionary War, or War of Independence, as it is variously called, was an anti-colonial war - an American revolutionary war of independence against British colonialism. This nation's Founders all engaged in anti-colonial behavior. Or is anti-colonial behavior acceptable only when you're not "Kenyan"?

Equally ridiculous is Newt's suggestion that Obama's Kenyan roots, through his immigrant father, place him somehow "outside our comprehension" as Americans or outside of the American experience. From the colonial era to the present day, each new American has brought with him or her the experiences of life in some other country, and those experiences have all become a part of the American experience. European settlers, African slaves, immigrants and refugees from around the world, have all brought experiences from somewhere else that have become part of our collective experience as a nation.

Equally ridiculous again is Newt's claim that Obama's African heritage has left him "out of touch with how the world works." If the African colonial experience is so "out of touch with how the world works," then why did Newt write his own 1971 doctoral dissertation on Belgian educational policy in the Congo? Why in his his dissertation did he criticize Belgium's colonial policy of imposing European Christian values on its colonized African subjects? What did Newt in 1971 understand about the relevance of the colonial experience that he seems now to have forgotten? Could Newt be as unfaithful to his own advanced education as he has been to his various wives?

Newt seems ignorant of history, but he is not. He knows exactly what he is doing, and he is counting on the ignorance of his audience to make it work for him and other Republicans in 2010 and 2012. He is playing the cards of racism and xenophobia, to a conservative white audience increasingly susceptible to racist and xenophobic ideas, using Obama's African immigrant roots to paint him as un-American and dangerous. This comes as no surprise: Newt has been pandering to the far-right's ugliest sentiments, fanning the flames of fear and hate as in the current "Ground Zero Mosque" controversy, for some time now. Newt obviously wants the 2012 Republican presidential nomination, and will do or say anything to get it.

However unsurprising, these statements are a new low for Newt, begging the question: How much lower will he go?

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com

SHANGHAI, CHINA-In yet another sign that the world looks upon the current U.S. president quite differently from his predecessors, Shanghai will see the opening of its very own Obama Club on April 26 (website under construction). I for one will make definite plans to be there on opening night, and can easily see it becoming a favorite watering hole for thirsty expats such as myself.

"Probably the largest entertainment clubhouse in Shanghai," according to its promotional materials, "the Obama Club is pampered and lavishly decorated - fitted with international top of the range multi-media, audio, and visual equipment designed to blow your mind.... The Obama Club will bring international glamour, excitement, and refined luxury to the Shanghai entertainment scene."

The club will open just in time for the opening also of the 2010 World Expo in Shanghai on May 1.

(see also Huffington Post)

Mark C. Eades
Shanghai, China
http://www.mceades.com

An incident of Driving While Teabagging resulting in violent road rage over an Obama bumper sticker occurred this week in Nashville, Tennessee. From WKRN, Nashville (includes video):

Road Rage, Accident Centers on Obama Bumper Sticker

Mar. 26, 2010

NASHVILLE, Tenn. - A Nashville man says he and his 10-year-old daughter were victims of road rage Thursday afternoon, all because of a political bumper sticker on his car.

Mark Duren told News 2 the incident happened around 4:30p.m., while he was driving on Blair Boulevard, not far from Belmont University.

He said Harry Weisiger gave him the bird and rammed into his vehicle, after noticing an Obama-Biden sticker on his car bumper.

Duren had just picked up his 10-year-old daughter from school and had her in the car with him.

"He pointed at the back of my car," Duren said, "the bumper, flipped me off, one finger salute."

But it didn't end there.

Duren told News 2 that Weisiger honked his horn at him for awhile, as Duren stopped at a stop sign.

Once he started driving again, down Blair Boulevard, towards his home, he said, "I looked in the rear view mirror again, and this same SUV was speeding, flying up behind me, bumped me."

Duren said he applied his brake and the SUV smashed into the back of his car.

He then put his car in park to take care of the accident, but Weisiger started pushing the car using his SUV.

Duren said, "He pushed my car up towards the sidewalk, almost onto the sidewalk."

Police say Harry Weisiger is charged with felony reckless endangerment in the incident.

Friends don't let friends teabag and drive.

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com

President Obama is under attack from AIPAC, the U.S. arm of Binyamin Netanyahu's Likud Party, for his stand against the illegal eviction of innocent Palestinians from their homes in East Jerusalem for construction of new Israeli settlements on stolen land. I urge you to go to http://www.whitehouse.gov/contact, state your support for President Obama's stand against illegal Israeli settlements in East Jerusalem, and urge him NOT to back down in spite of any attacks from AIPAC. We need to close ranks around our President on this one, and let him know that he has our full support.

(See also M.J. Rosenberg, TPM)

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com

See Tom Brandt, The Eastern Echo (Ypsilanti MI):

Observes Mr. Brandt, probingly: "Republicans are not sparing the rod when it comes to beating up on President Obama's economic stimulus package, but it's clear they are unable to raise their membership to withstand the newly found vigor of his congressional muscle.... The Obama package may not be the best piece of stimulative legislation ever to enter the Oval Office, but...it certainly beats any package Bush ever raised." [More]

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com

For an all-too-brief period between the Democratic congressional victory of 2006 and Barack Obama's inauguration as President of the United States in 2009, many progressives hoped and believed that the long conservative era in contemporary American politics was over, and that the dawn of a bold new progressive era was upon us. As Democrats in Washington have shown themselves utterly lacking in the political will to carry out their own campaign promises, however, such hopes have greatly evaporated, and a conservative movement that seems to have recovered its strength much faster than most of us expected now threatens to turn back the Democratic victories of 2006 and 2008 as quickly as they were won. Not only triumphalist Republicans, but even some on the Left are openly suggesting that, if Democrats in Washington don't change their weak-kneed ways, the coming election cycles of 2010 and 2012 could conceivably end in a Republican recapture of not only Congress, but perhaps even the White House. Given such a depressing prospect, it seems worth considering what a new Republican America might look like.

To say that today's G.O.P. is no longer "your father's G.O.P." would be the understatement of the century: Today's G.O.P. is not even your slightly older sibling's G.O.P. In 2000, George W. Bush ran for president as a "compassionate conservative." Of course the Bush years turned out to be anything but compassionate, but it's hard to imagine any Republican today playing even such a quaint tidbit of lip-service as this to any form of moderation. For any Republican politician to stand before CPAC or a "tea party" convention today and describe himself or herself as a "compassionate conservative" would be only to invite boos and hisses of angry ridicule. Today's Republican Party and today's conservative movement, purely and simply, is a raging and seething engine of hate. We gained an early look into this ugly new brand of conservatism during the 2008 campaign, when vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin was openly questioning Obama's loyalty to his country and Palin's enraged followers were openly attacking Obama on the basis of his race and calling for his death. Since that time, the face of American conservatism has grown uglier almost by the day.

If I were to grasp at an historical precedent for what a new Republican America might look like, my first guess would be something like the McCarthy era, with touches of the South during the darkest days of the struggle for civil rights. I would guess that Republican leaders would be eager both to exact payback for their defeats in 2006 and 2008 and to make sure nothing like that is allowed to ever happen again. I would expect to see measures resembling those of the McCarthy era taken against progressive groups across the country, to see trumped-up charges leveled against groups such as ACORN, backed up by the full weight of a deeply politicized Justice Department and judiciary, to see crackdowns on free expression carried out in the name of national security, domestic spying programs enhanced, and blacklists written up. I would also expect to see such measures greeted with enthusiastic joy by a "tea party" grassroots eager and feeling entitled to engage in a little repression of its own. In such an atmosphere of impunity, the threats that "we're coming for you liberals" already abundant in angry comments to left-wing blog posts could quickly become a reality.

This may be only a worst-case scenario, admittedly expressed in rather extreme terms, but it's not wholly outside the realm of possibility, particularly given recent history. I've already noted the hate-filled 2008 Republican campaign, which was truly astonishing to watch, as well as the increasingly ugly "tea party" events that have taken place since the election. These events have proven to be a rich recruiting ground for white supremacist and anti-government militia groups, whose memberships have swelled since the 2008 elections as many reports have observed. Obama's election seems to have touched a raw nerve in conservative white America, unleashing a torrent of right-wing rage unseen in this country since integration was imposed on angry white Southerners more than forty years ago. Conservatives are not only engaging in all manner of insane conspiracy theories regarding the election; some are now showing up at political events carrying guns. This didn't happen when Bill Clinton was elected president in 1992, nor do I think it would be happening with such ferocity had the victorious Democrat in 2008 likewise been white.

With her exhortations to those hate-filled "real Americans" who attended her rallies in 2008, Sarah Palin knew exactly what she was doing, and bears as much guilt as anyone for their ugly outcome. Palin is as vicious a hatemonger as Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Ann Coulter, or any other media figure on the far right, the only difference being that Palin aspires to national office and just might achieve it given the current mood of much of the country. Should this woefully come to pass, Palin would join such official Republican luminaries as Michele Bachmann, Jim DeMint, Jim Inhofe, Virginia Foxx, and others who have turned the Republican Party into something even Ronald Reagan might have trouble recognizing, not to mention Dwight Eisenhower or Barry Goldwater: conservatives, for whom I would never have voted, but who at least seem to have maintained some hold on reality. It's hard to imagine what Ike would have to say to a "tea party" convention.

Liz Cheney's recent McCarthyite attack on seven Justice Department lawyers for carrying out their assigned task of defending terror suspects detained at Guantanamo bodes equally ill for what we can expect if Republicans succeed in recapturing power in Washington. For simply doing their jobs, providing the defense representation to which anyone accused of wrongdoing is entitled under U.S. and international law (even Nazi war criminals tried at Nuremberg had defense attorneys), Cheney and her group, "Keep America Safe," have branded these lawyers terrorist sympathizers, questioned their loyalty to the United States, and publicly blacklisted them on their website, while Cheney's allies in right-wing media branded the Obama Justice Department "the Department of Jihad" (see TPM, HuffPo, Salon). Liz Cheney is obviously as vicious and vile a piece of work as her infamous father, if not worse, and would be almost certain to play a role in any future Republican administration.

Democrats and progressives truly have cause for concern at the grim prospect of Republican victories in the coming election cycles of 2010 and 2012, and the whole country - with the exception of its far-right lunatic fringe - will soon have cause for concern if this grim prospect comes to fruition. Should such a nightmare come to life, Democrats in Washington will have only themselves to blame for their failure to deliver on the mandate and the opportunity handed them in 2006 and 2008. We cannot blame Republicans who, after all, are only doing what Republicans do. It's time for Democrats in Washington to get off their lazy and timid rear-parts and start doing what Democratic voters elected them to do, so that Democratic voters will have a reason to elect them again, and again, and again. For the sake of every sane and civilized one of us, today's Republican Party cannot ever be allowed to hold the reins of power.

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com

Progressive political action group MoveOn is raising massive funds to run ads against conservative independent senator Joe Lieberman of Connecticut for his opposition to health care reform. From an initial goal of $400,000 on Dec. 15, MoveOn has at time of this writing raised more than $900,000 toward a new goal of one million dollars, and the contributions keep rolling in. Says MoveOn:

"First, Joe Lieberman helped President Bush invade Iraq. Then he endorsed John McCain and attacked Barack Obama at the Republican National Convention. Now he's single-handedly gutting health care reform. It's time to hold him accountable. Senator Lieberman must go.... So we're going to make sure every voter in Connecticut knows what he's doing. And then, when he comes up for re-election, we'll make sure we send him home for good. Can you chip in to make Joe pay? "

Although Lieberman won't be up for re-election until 2012, it's never too early to start working toward getting rid of him once and for all. Recent polls in Connecticut have consistently shown low approval and high disapproval ratings for Lieberman, and indicate that if the election were held today he would likely lose.

In the meantime, Harry Reid and other Senate Democrats can and should be pressed to strip Lieberman of his seniority, his chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee, and his other committee memberships for his opposition to health care reform. Polls on health care reform indicate that a majority in Connecticut and across America want robust reform including a public option now. A recent Research 2000 poll commissioned by Daily Kos found that 68 percent of likely voters in Connecticut support a public option, while only 21 percent oppose. National polls likewise show that a clear majority support the public option (Boston Globe, Reuters, Washington Post). Lieberman clearly has his own agenda, however, serving not only his own obvious arrogance and vindictiveness but also the for-profit health and insurance industries that have given him millions of dollars in campaign contributions while residents of his state have suffered due to lack of health insurance (See also Rachel Maddow, Salon).

MoveOn's gallant and stunningly successful fundraising efforts against Lieberman on behalf of health care reform deserve the support of progressives everywhere. Donate now.

Mark C. Eades
Shanghai, China
http://www.mceades.com

Joe Lieberman's time has come.

If Lieberman joins Senate Republicans in opposing health care reform, he should be immediately stripped of his seniority, his chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee, and his other committee memberships. If he threatens to leave the Democratic Caucus and join the GOP, call his bluff, and if he chooses to leave, let him go. It means nothing to have Lieberman's name on a list as Senate Democrat #60 if he is only going to oppose his fellow Democrats and defy his own constituents on every important issue. Health care advocates should contact their Democratic senators now and demand action against Lieberman, and advocacy groups should begin running ads against him in his home state of Connecticut, highlighting the millions of dollars in campaign contributions he has received from the for-profit health and insurance industries while residents of his state have suffered due to lack of health insurance.

While he is not up for re-election until 2012, recent polls in Connecticut have consistently shown low approval and high disapproval ratings for Lieberman, and indicate that if the election were held today he would likely lose. Polls on health care reform meanwhile show that a majority in Connecticut and across America want robust reform including a public option now. A recent Research 2000 poll commissioned by Daily Kos found that 68 percent of likely voters in Connecticut support a public option, while only 21 percent oppose. National polls likewise show that a clear majority support the public option (Boston Globe, Reuters, Washington Post).

MSNBC's Rachel Maddow discussed Lieberman's reasons for defying his constituents and fellow Democrats this week on her show, including not only Lieberman's millions in contributions from the health and insurance industries but also his wife's work for a health care lobbying firm whose clients benefitted from Lieberman's legislation (see also Salon).

Time and time again we have heard from Democrats in Washington: "Joe is with us on everything but the war.... Joe's a good guy.... Good old Joe...." Clearly, good old Joe is with no one but himself and his friends in the health and insurance industries. The fact that Lieberman was willing to tell outright lies about the public option to explain his actions shows the depths of self-serving opportunism to which he has sunk.

Democrats must stop rewarding Lieberman for his treachery, must stop making excuses for him, and must make it clear to him that there will be a high price to pay for standing in the way of health care reform.

Mark C. Eades
Shanghai, China
http://www.mceades.com

Watching the 2010 US midterm election season open from my vantage-point far across the Pacific in China, I can barely contain my glee at the latest news from New York's 23rd congressional district as its Nov. 3 special election approaches. Due to the growing rift between the GOP establishment and its frothing-at-the-mouth conservative base, Democrat Bill Owens (pictured here, see campaign website) appears increasingly likely to capture what until now has been considered a safe Republican seat. With strong support from the right-wingnut faction of the Republican Party - including endorsements from leading wingnuts such as Rush Limbaugh, Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, and Michele Bachmann - Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman has drawn enough conservative support away from moderate Republican Dede Scozzafava to give the Democrat a clear lead in both poll numbers and fundraising.

Despite endorsements and support from establishment Republicans like Newt Gingrich, Scozzafava has fallen to second place in two recent polls, the most recent showing her carrying 30% of likely voters to Owens' 35% and Hoffman's 23% (see CQ Politics, Daily Kos). Meanwhile, campaign fundraising figures released Oct. 22 show that Owens raised more than his two rivals combined between July 1 and Oct. 14: Fundraising totals for the three are $502,197 for Owens, $233,583 for Scozzafava, and $205,139 for Hoffman (see Swing State Project, NY Daily News). This is not not good news for the GOP, but of course it is wonderful news for Democrats. A conservative-leaning Democrat and therefore not an especially exciting candidate for progressives in and of himself, Owens' surge nonetheless represents an opportunity for Democrats across the United States and abroad to take one more seat in Congress away from the Republicans and grab some early momentum as we head into 2010.

It would also be a lot of fun meanwhile to watch the GOP slide into even deeper disarray. I for one relish the prospect of the NY-23 special election signalling all-out war nationwide between a pragmatic but impotent GOP establishment led by Gingrich and a tea-party faction led by the likes of Limbaugh, Palin, Beck, and Bachmann. Boy howdy, what a show! Should wingnuts turn against the Republican establishment and split the conservative vote nationwide, what looked like a less-than-promising midterm election year for Democrats could turn into a far better year than any expected. 

In addition to Owens' campaign website, support may be directed his way via Act Blue and/or via the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Mark C. Eades
Shanghai, China
http://www.mceades.com

Photo: US Consulate General, Shanghai
(See also Shanghai Daily, Expo 2010)

SHANGHAI, CHINA-US Ambassador to China Jon Huntsman visited the USA Pavilion under construction at the 2010 World Expo site in Shanghai this week, and said that President Barack Obama is "very excited" about his upcoming trip to China. Huntsman's visit Oct. 14, his first to Shanghai since his ambassadorial appointment by Obama in August, comes just one month away from the president's first Asian tour, which will include stops in Shanghai and Beijing. The president's excitement at his visit will be more than evenly matched by that both of the Chinese people and of Americans living and working in China.

Huntsman visited the World Expo site for a "topping-off" ceremony marking completion of major structural work on the USA Pavilion following an aggressive 89-day building effort. At the ceremony Huntsman and Shanghai Expo Bureau director general Hong Hao signed their names in Chinese characters on the final steel beam to be put into place on the pavilion structure. Long delayed due to funding difficulties, the USA Pavilion is now among the first dozen national pavilions to have finished major structural work. When completed, the 5600-square-meter pavilion will be among the largest at the expo site. With an estimated budget of $61 million - more than $40 million of which has already been raised from private sponsors - it is certain also to be among the most expensive.

The US ambassador told reporters that the rapid progress on the construction of the USA pavilion was due to the "outstanding and patient" collaboration among the Shanghai government, the expo bureau, and the non-profit USA Pavilion team as well as support from the US government and sponsor companies, according to Shanghai Daily. "Our national pavilion will showcase American business and technology, as well as culture and values, to foster stronger friendship between the American and Chinese peoples as it also demonstrates America's commitment to a forward-looking, positive relationship with China," Huntsman quoted aptly from US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Like other national pavilions at the 2010 World Expo in Shanghai, the USA Pavilion will provide jobs not only for local Chinese staff but also for US citizens residing in Shanghai (the number of which has grown of late owing to unemployment in the US). Together with President Obama's visit next month and the World Expo beginning in May, the coming months look to be exciting and promising ones for Americans in China. Despite recent trade disagreements between the US and China, Obama remains popular here, and is certain to receive a welcome from the Chinese people that will put smiles on the faces of expats. In Shanghai already, Chinese young people can be seen sporting Obama t-shirts, street vendors sell pirate DVD editions of Obama's speeches and pirate print editions of his books, and universities are planning special lectures coinciding with Obama's visit.

Obama will visit Shanghai and Beijing Nov. 15-18 during a four-nation tour that will also take him to Japan and South Korea in addition to his appearance at the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Singapore. While in China he will meet with Chinese President Hu Jintao on issues including trade, energy, climate change, and security. There is no word as yet whether the president's Shanghai stop will include a look at the USA Pavilion site.

Mark C. Eades
Visiting Professor of English Language and Literature,
Shanghai International Studies University
http://www.mceades.com

As an American living and working abroad I watched President Obama's speech at the United Nations General Assembly with great pride and more than a little relief:

Pride, following the shame of our previous administration's arrogant unilateralism; and relief, that our previous administration wasn't followed by another just like it or worse. All too well as an American abroad I recall the embarrassment of being represented on the world stage by a tactless, insensitive president who seemed to possess little more than a child's understanding of the world.

President Obama's speech at the UN General Assembly, on the other hand, was that of a true statesman and a world leader of the highest caliber, with no apologies and no excuses. I think it was among the best speeches of his career thus far.

Any criticism of it by his political opponents in the United States amounts to nothing but sour grapes and a sad attempt to deny their own disastrous failure of the past eight years.

Mark C. Eades
Visiting Professor of English Language and Literature,
Shanghai International Studies University
http://www.mceades.com

SHANGHAI, CHINA-While strolling through the shopping arcades surrounding Shanghai's sixteenth-century Yu Garden this afternoon, I happened upon a t-shirt shop prominently displaying one shirt (pictured below) featuring the smiling image of US president Barack Obama beside other shirts including images of Che Guevara and Chairman Mao. Were such a juxtaposition of Obama, Guevara, and Mao to appear at a t-shirt shop in the United States, it would only serve to confirm for Obama's detractors that he is indeed some sort of Communist. Were it to appear at a t-shirt shop, say, in some left-wing mecca like my own San Francisco or Berkeley, I suppose it would surprise no one. Its appearance at a t-shirt shop in Mao's own People's Republic of China, however, struck me as something a little special.

When the president visits China in mid-November as planned, he may face an audience as tough as any he has faced at home. Obama's recent decision on behalf of the United Auto Workers union to impose a 35% tariff on tire imports from China has angered many Chinese and prompted calls for in-kind retaliatory measures against the United States. Unlike the president's fans in Europe, Africa, and even the Middle East, many pragmatic Chinese view US affairs strictly through the prism of how America's actions affect China's material interests, and will not be swayed by the kind of grand statements on world peace and brotherhood among men that so electrified his audiences in Berlin and Cairo. Nonetheless, admiration for Obama remains strong among the more idealistic youth of China, and here in front of me today was my president's image on a Chinese t-shirt.

I have been visiting China since 1991, and have spent altogether about a year and a half living in Shanghai; and this is the first time in China I have ever seen a US president's image on a t-shirt. I have also seen pirate DVD editions of Obama's speeches for sale on the street, and at my university have seen Chinese professors showing Obama's speeches to classrooms full of attentive students. My own students also seem to hold Obama, not merely in admiration, but even in a kind of awe. More than any other recent US president, Obama seems to be seen - at least among many young people in China - not merely as the president of one powerful overseas nation, but as a world leader perhaps of unprecedented importance, and from whom much is expected.

Of course, even older and less idealistic Chinese will tell you that Obama is "better than Bush." To his good fortune, Obama's immediate predecessor was one against whom it would be rather easy to win a popularity contest anywhere in the world except perhaps in Israel. Being "better than Bush" still serves Obama well, and probably will for some time to come. Despite the tendency here (at least for the average Zhou Six-Pack or Zhou the Plumber) to view US actions more-or-less exclusively on the basis of how they affect China, both Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq and his arrogant behavior with the world at-large made him immensely unpopular here. Just as Obama is the first US president whose image I've ever seen on a Chinese t-shirt, Bush was the first I've ever heard people in China tell me they just couldn't stand the sight of.

Despite his current troubles at home and abroad, however, Obama has far more going for him than the mere fact that he isn't George W. Bush. Appealing to the youth of China may be the key to his success here, and come November, I would hope to see many of China's youth wearing t-shirts like the one I saw today.

Perhaps I'll even see Zhou the Plumber wearing one.

Mark C. Eades
Visiting Professor of English Language and Literature,
Shanghai International Studies University
http://www.mceades.com

SHANGHAI, CHINA-Having arrived in China from the United States just over a week ago, I find it strange watching political news from my own country far back across the Pacific. My apartment for visiting overseas faculty at Shanghai International Studies University is equipped with international cable TV including Al-Jazeera in English, whose world news coverage includes US news stories of interest to international viewers; and via high-speed internet I can watch US domestic news on my laptop as pictured here. Al-Jazeera is clearly the superior product for world news, and I long ago gave up on getting anything of value on US politics from CNN, but I have enjoyed watching MSNBC's Keith Olbermann and Rachel Maddow from Shanghai on my laptop in addition to my usual daily readings from the Huffington Post and TPM, all via standard local broadband service despite all reports that overseas news sites are inaccessible in China. Domestic Chinese media also cover US politics in detail; and in stark contrast to his immediate predecessor, President Barack Obama appears to be quite popular in China, particularly with young people as elsewhere in the world. Obama's anticipated visit to China in November promises to be quite an event.

Among US domestic stories covered in detail by Al-Jazeera and other international media, most prominent is the fight for (and against) health care reform, Al-Jazeera observing like some in our own media the embarrassing fact that the US is the only nation in the industrialized world which does not provide universal health care to its citizens. As I write this, in fact, Al-Jazeera is comparing the US health care system to those in other developed countries around the world, and showing brief clips of shouting Obamaphobes at town hall meetings bent on maintaining our sad status quo. Nothing, however, can compare to Olbermann and Maddow for detailed coverage of the continuing town hall fiasco across the United States. Yesterday I watched video on Olbermann of right-wingers at a town hall in some dark corner of America rudely shouting down a disabled woman in a wheelchair, and I felt ashamed to be from the same country as these ignorant pigs. Lots can be blamed on the health care industry for the opposition to reform, but the ugly behavior of ordinary right-wing Americans at town halls can only be blamed on themselves and their own willful ignorance. These people are a disgrace to civilized human beings everywhere.

I would say the same about those I've also watched on my laptop making stupid Obamaphobic statements about the President's upcoming speech to American schoolchildren. US presidents regularly visit schools and address America's children, yet when this president follows suit these morons naturally assume some dark purpose at work. Professional liars like Glenn Beck and Ann Coulter say such things because they are paid to say them. Ordinary Americans who say such things, on the other hand, do so simply out of ignorance and hate. Ignorant people in remote areas of rural China or other developing countries at least have an excuse for their ignorance. In America there is no excuse. If you're ignorant in America it's because you have chosen to be ignorant. I repeat: These fellow citizens of mine are a disgrace, and their absence from my immediate surroundings makes my heart not the least bit fonder of them. Their persistent irrational disregard of the facts makes me feel quite certain that simple racism is at the heart of the matter for many Obamaphobes, whether they admit it or not, and for this in America in 2009 there can be no excuse.

Meanwhile, new US ambassador Jon Huntsman has announced that Obama will visit China in mid-November. Obama's visit is certain to generate excitement among young Chinese as well as among expat Americans like myself, and I would fully expect to see cheering crowds of youthful admirers, souvenir Obama t-shirts, and other trappings of Obamamania here just as we have seen around the world. This will be a great time to be an American in China. With a $61 million US pavilion currently under construction for the 2010 World Expo in Shanghai, I am hoping that the president will visit here as well as Beijing, but if not I am very tempted to buy an air ticket to the capital so as not to miss the event. My last visit to China was shortly after the US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, and I can tell you that George W. Bush was and remains as unpopular in China as anywhere else in the world. Despite Obama's troubles at home, his stellar popularity around the world makes being an American abroad a much more pleasant proposition than it was only a year ago.

Noticeable particularly on Al-Jazeera is the change in America's tone on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict since Obama took office, and the resulting change in how America's role in the conflict is portrayed. The new US administration's sharp criticism of continued Israeli settlement expansion in the West Bank has, at least on Al-Jazeera, resulted in the US no longer being portrayed merely as a lackey of Israel. Israel now stands alone as the responsible party for its continued violation of international law and Palestinian human rights, and - if only in a spirit of cautious optimism - Obama's America is coming to be regarded as a far more balanced broker for peace. This is nothing but good news for Americans at home and abroad.

Mark C. Eades
Visiting Professor of English Language and Literature,
Shanghai International Studies University
http://www.mceades.com

Is it because she is fleeing prosecution for knowingly submitting a forged document to a federal court? Is it because she is secretly an Israeli agent working to undermine Barack Obama? Is it because she fears that black men in suits and sunglasses are coming from Washington to kill her?

I don't know the answer, but "birther queen" Orly Taitz was indeed interviewed by MSNBC from Tel Aviv on Aug. 3 - only two days after submitting, to a federal district court in California for "authentication," a document alleged to be Obama's Kenyan birth certificate now pretty conclusively proven to be a forgery. Following her gleeful release of the document on Aug. 1, Taitz must be a little surprised by the speed at which it has been picked apart on the internet and shown to be an almost certain forgery. I don't know what the penalty might be if it is determined that Taitz knowingly submitted a forged document to a federal court for the sole purpose of doing political harm to the President of the United States, but it is the one good reason I can think of why she would so suddenly leave the country at what only two days ago seemed (at least to her and her demented followers) to be her moment of triumph. While she may indeed fear that black Men in Black are coming to kill her, I would seriously question the theory some have suggested that she might be an Israeli agent working to undermine Obama, if only because I assume the Israelis would be smarter than to entrust such a task to such an obvious nutjob as Orly Taitz.

Taitz appears haggard and even more disturbed than usual in her MSNBC interview with David Schuster, who charged in a question at the end of the interview that Taitz refused a ride to MSNBC's affiliate in Tel Aviv the same day because the driver appeared to be a Muslim. A Soviet-born holder of dual US/Israeli citizenship, Taitz is on record with the Orange County Register stating that Israel should not merely defeat but "exterminate" its Arab enemies, whatever "collateral damage" may occur among innocent Arab civilians (see also Tablet). Having wondered previously why an immigrant from the former Soviet Union would be as obsessed with Obama's birth certificate as any down-home American redneck, I'm beginning to to think it might just be a case of Transatlantic Islamophobia.

Orly Taitz claims that she is merely a "lawyer," with a purely "legal" interest in the details of Obama's birth, but I obviously suspect there's more to her Obama birth obsession than this or mere insanity. Taitz hails from a milieu of Soviet-born Israelis among whom far-right, anti-Arab and anti-Muslim sentiment runs much stronger by most accounts than among the general Israeli population, as numerous Israeli and international sources have observed. Witness the rise of Avigdor Lieberman, Soviet-born leader of the far-right Yisrael Beiteinu party, made up mostly of other Soviet-born Israelis with strongly anti-Arab views, many of whom live not in Israel itself but in West Bank settlements; and many of whom really, really don't like Barack Hussein Obama.

Taitz has a documented association with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a powerful pro-Israel lobby group with close ties to Binyamin Netanyahu's right-wing Likud party, as Allison Hoffman notes in Tablet. I'd be very interested in hearing what sympathies Taitz may have not just for Likud but for Yisrael Beiteinu, and what connections she may have with Soviet-born settlers in the West Bank. As observed above, she is on record saying that Israel's Arab enemies should be "exterminated" rather than merely defeated, and appears to have refused a ride to MSNBC's affiliate in Tel Aviv because she believed the driver to be a Muslim. Like right-wing settlers (see video), Taitz is also fond of calling her critics "nazis" or "brownshirts," as she did with David Schuster in her interview from Tel Aviv. Taitz spoke about her birther activities in a March 1 interview with Israeli National Radio.

Could this be why she has found so much in common with Islamophobic American rednecks who think that Obama is a secret Muslim born in Kenya? Could it also be that America's best interests are not those she has most at heart in her dogged efforts to undermine our president?

Mark C. Eades
http://www.mceades.com