DOCSLIB.ORG

Barack Obama's Post-American Foreign Policy: the Limits of Engagement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Singh, Robert. "Notes." Barack Obama's Post-American Foreign Policy: The Limits of Engagement. London: Bloomsbury Academic, 2012. 203–226. Bloomsbury Collections. Web. 30 Sep. 2021. <http://dx.doi.org/10.5040/9781780931111.0007>. Downloaded from Bloomsbury Collections, www.bloomsburycollections.com, 30 September 2021, 15:45 UTC. Copyright © Robert Singh 2012. You may share this work for non-commercial purposes only, provided you give attribution to the copyright holder and the publisher, and provide a link to the Creative Commons licence. Notes Chapter One 1 Richard Wolffe, Renegade: The Making of Barack Obama (London: Virgin Books, 2009), 20. 2 Quoted in Helene Cooper, “On the world stage, Obama issues an overture,” New York Times April 2, 2009, at http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/03/world/ europe/03assess.html?ref=us. 3 Christopher Caldwell, “Leaders for our time: do crises demand craziness?”, Financial Times September 3–4, 2011, 11. 4 Michael Hirsh, “The Decider?”, National Journal July 30, 2011, 37. 5 The underemployment rate combines those unemployed Americans with those in part-time work who are seeking, or would accept, full-time employment. 6 The US Census Bureau recorded 46.2 million Americans in 2010 below the poverty line, of $22,314 for a family of four and $11,139 for an individual. That amounted to 15.1 percent of the US population, the highest since 1993. See Matt Kennard and Shannon Bond, “US poverty hits record levels,” Financial Times September 14, 2011, 10. 7 Ibid . 8 John R. Talbott, Obamanomics: How Bottom-Up Economic Prosperity Will Replace Trickle-down Economics (New York: Seven Stories Press, 2008). 9 According to Gallup, Obama’s job approval in the last week of August 2011 averaged 40 percent, tying with his record-low 40 percent approval ratings for the two weeks commencing August 8. Only African Americans, Democrats and liberals gave him majority approval. See http://www.gallup.com/poll/149225/ Obama-Weekly-Average-Approval-Holds-Term-Low.aspx. 10 One-fi fth of Americans strongly approved of Obama’s performance, according to the Rasmussen daily tracking poll, at http://www.rasmussenreports.com/ public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll. 11 According to a Washington Post-ABC poll conducted from August 29 to September 1, 2011, at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/ postabcpoll_090111.html. 12 From the Washington Post-ABC poll, ibid ., at http://www.washingtonpost. com/obamas-approval-ratings-skid-to-new-low-economic-stewardship-in- question/2011/09/05/gIQACwxH5J_graphic.html. 13 President Obama famously stated, in an interview with ABC’s “World News” anchor Diane Sawyer on January 25, 2010, that “I’d rather be a really good one-term president than a mediocre two-term president.” See Mark Mooney, “Exclusive: President Obama Would ‘Rather Be Really Good One-Term President’,” January 25, 2010, at http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Politics/ president-obama-good-term-president/story?id=9657337. 14 The phrase is from Obama’s June 2, 2008 speech in St Paul, Minnesota when he had fi nally won suffi cient delegates to the Democratic National Convention to become the party’s nominee for president. See http://www.nytimes. com/2008/06/03/us/politics/03text-obama.html. 15 There now exists an extensive literature challenging the consensus notion that American primacy is under fatal threat, whether from American decline or the 203 204 NOTES “rise of the rest.” Among other valuable works, see especially: Stephen Brooks and William Wohlforth, World Out Of Balance: international relations and the challenge of American primacy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2008); Michael Mandelbaum, The Frugal Superpower: America’s Global Leadership in a Cash-Strapped Era (New York, Public Affairs, 2010); Carla Norrlof, America’s Global Advantage: US Hegemony and International Cooperation (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010); Eric S. Edelman, Understanding America’s Contested Primacy (Washington, DC: Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, 2010); Josef Joffe, “The Default Power,” Foreign Affairs 88 (2) 2009, 21–35; Robert J. Lieber, “Persistent Primacy and the Future of the American Era,” International Politics 46 (2/3) 2009, 119–39; and Robert J. Lieber, “Staying Power and the American Future: Problems of Primacy, Policy, and Grand Strategy,” The Journal of Strategic Studies 34 (4) 2011, 509–530. 16 Fareed Zakaria, The Post-American World (New York: Allen Lane, 2008), 4–5. 17 “Remarks by the President in State of Union address,” January 25, 2011, at http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-offi ce/2011/01/25/remarks-president-state- union-address. 18 “Address by the President to a Joint Session of Congress,” September 8, 2011, at http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-offi ce/2011/09/08/address-president-joint- session-congress. 19 Adam Quinn, “The art of declining politely: Obama’s prudent presidency and the waning of American power,” International Affairs 87 (4) 2011, 803–24. 20 Stanley A. Renshon, National Security in the Obama Administration: Reassessing the Bush Doctrine (New York: Routledge, 2010). 21 For an excellent elaboration of the distinction, see Paul McCartney, “American Nationalism and US Foreign Policy from September 11 to the Iraq War,” Political Science Quarterly 119 (3) 2004, 399–424. 22 See Gary C. Jacobson, “Polarization, Public Opinion, and the Presidency: the Obama and Anti-Obama Coalitions,” Chapter 5 in Bert A. Rockman, Andrew Rudalevige and Colin Campbell (eds.), The Obama Presidency: Appraisals and Prospects (Washington, DC: CQ Press, 2012), 94–122. 23 According to Gallup, Americans’ political ideology at the mid-year point of 2011 looked similar to 2009 and 2010, with 41 percent self-identifying as conservative, 36 percent as moderate, and 21 percent as liberal, at http://www.gallup.com/ poll/148745/Political-Ideology-Stable-Conservatives-Leading.aspx. 24 “If,” in Rudyard Kipling, Selected Poems (London: Penguin, 1993), 134–5. 25 Fareed Zakaria, The Post-American World (New York: Allen Lane, 2008). 26 Barack Obama, “A World That Stands as One,” Berlin, Germany, July 24, 2008, at: http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,567920,00.html. 27 Barack Obama, The Audacity of Hope (New York: Crown Publishers, 2006), 279. 28 Inderjeet Parmar, “American power and identities in the age of Obama,” International Politics 48 (2–3) 2011, 153–63, at 154. 29 Quoted in Paul Steinhauser, “Obama: my presidency would unleash a ‘transformation’,” CNN.com, 27 July, http://articles.cnn.com/2007-07-27/ politics/obama.black.votes_1_affi rmative-action-presidential-forum-obama?_ s=PM:POLITICS. 30 Jonathan Alter, for example, records that in the middle of 2009, Obama’s popularity in ten nations was higher than in the US: Kenya, 94 percent; Germany, 93 percent; France, 91 percent; Canada, 88 percent; Nigeria, 88 percent; Britain, 86 percent; Japan, 85 percent; South Korea, 81 percent; India, 77 percent; Brazil, 76 percent; US, 74 percent. See Jonathan Alter, The Promise (London: Simon NOTES 205 and Schuster, 2010), 224. Other selected surveys over 2009–11 are mentioned in subsequent chapters. 31 Hardball with Chris Matthews , MSNBC, December 10, 2009. Quoted in Windsor Mann (ed.), The Quotable Hitchens: from Alcohol to Zionism (Cambridge, MA: Da Capo Press, 2011), 207. 32 According to Gallup polls, at http://www.gallup.com/poll/1726/Presidential- Ratings-Issue-Approval.aspx. 33 James Traub, “The Two Obamas,” at http://www.foreignpolicy.com/ articles/2010/08/06/the_two_obamas?page=0,0. 34 Stephen Walt, “Obama is zero for four and Republicans are sitting pretty,” at http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/07/30/obama_is_zero_for_four_and_ republicans_are_sitting_pretty%20. 35 Quoted in James Kitfi eld, “The 13 th Crisis,” National Journal August 7, 2010, 10–18, at 15. 36 Cited in Con Coughlin, “Cameron has given up on Afghanistan,” The Spectator July 31, 2010, 12–13, at 13. 37 Quoted in Ryan Lizza, “The consequentialist,” New Yorker May 2, 2011, 55. 38 Giles Whittell, “America lost more than lives on that fateful day,” The Times September 10, 2011, 10–11. 39 Jeffrey Sachs, “The great failure of globalization,” Financial Times August 18, 2011, 11. 40 Stanley A. Renshon, Barack Obama and the Politics of Redemption (New York: Routledge, 2012); David Remnick, The Bridge: The Life and Rise of Barack Obama (London: Picador, 2010); Richard Wolffe, Renegade: The Making of Barack Obama (London: Virgin Books, 2009); David Mendell, Obama: From Promise to Power (New York: Amistad, 2007); Shelby Steele, A Bound Man: Why We Are Excited About Obama and Why He Can’t Win (New York: The Free Press, 2007); John K. Wilson, Barack Obama: This Improbable Quest (London: Paradigm Publishers, 2008); Jerome R. Corsi, The Obama Nation: Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2008); Martin Dupuis and Keith Boeckelman, Barack Obama: the New Face of American Politics (London: Praeger, 2008); Dinesh D’Souza, The Roots of Obama’s Rage (New York: Regnery, 2010). 41 Larry J. Sabato (ed.), The Year of Obama: How Barack Obama Won the White House (New York: Longman, 2010); Kevin J. McMahon, David M. Rankin, Donald W. Beacher and John Kenneth White, Winning The White House, 2008 (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009); Daniel J. Balz and Haynes Bonner Johnson, The Battle For America, 2008: The Story of an Extraordinary Election (Viking Books, 2009); Carl Pedersen, Obama’s America (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2009); John Heilemann and Mark Halperin, Race of a Lifetime: How Obama Won The White House (London: Viking, 2010); Ian Leslie, To Be President: Quest for the White House 2008 (London: Politico’s Press, 2009); Chuck Todd, Sheldon Gawiser, and Ana Maria Arumi, How Barack Obama Won: A State-by-State Guide to the Historic 2008 Presidential Election (New York: Vintage Books, 2009); David Plouffe, The Audacity To Win: the Insider Story and Lessons of Barack Obama’s Historic Victory (New York: Viking Press, 2009).
Recommended publications
  • 1 BARACK OBAMA, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, and JOHN DEWEY In

    1 BARACK OBAMA, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, and JOHN DEWEY In

    File: Schulten web preprint Created on: 1/29/2009 9:52:00 AM Last Printed: 1/31/2009 2:13:00 PM BARACK OBAMA, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, AND JOHN DEWEY SUSAN SCHULTEN In the last few months, there has been a spate of comparisons be- tween Obama and some of our most influential former presidents. Just days after the election, Congress announced the theme of the inaugura- tion as “A New Birth of Freedom,” while reporters and commentators speculate about “A New New Deal” or “Lincoln 2.0.”1 Many of these comparisons are situational: Obama is a relatively inexperienced lawyer- turned-politician who will inherit two wars and an economic crisis un- equalled since the Great Depression.2 The backlash has been equally vocal. Many consider these com- parisons both premature and presumptuous, evidence that the media is sympathetic toward an Obama Administration or that the President-elect has himself orchestrated these connections.3 Indeed, Obama frequently invoked Lincoln as both a model for and an influence over his own can- didacy, which he launched on the steps of the Old State Capitol in Springfield, Illinois. He introduced Vice-President Joe Biden in the same spot, where the latter also referenced the memory of Lincoln.4 Cer- tainly it makes sense for Obama to exploit Lincoln’s legacy, for no other figure in American history continues to command such admiration, the occasional neo-Confederate or other detractor notwithstanding.5 To posi- tion Obama in front of the State House is surely meant to place him as a kind of an heir to Lincoln.
  • February 26, 2020 Chairman David Skaggs Co-Chairwoman Allison

    February 26, 2020 Chairman David Skaggs Co-Chairwoman Allison

    February 26, 2020 Chairman David Skaggs Co-Chairwoman Allison Hayward Office of Congressional Ethics 425 3rd Street, SW Suite 1110 Washington, DC 20024 Dear Chairman Skaggs and Co-Chairwoman Hayward: We write to request that the Office of Congressional Ethics (“OCE”) investigate whether Representative Devin Nunes is receiving free legal services in violation of the Rules of the House of Representatives (“House rules”). Specifically, Representative Nunes retained an attorney who represents him in several defamation lawsuits in various courts where he seeks a total of nearly $1 billion in damages. House rules prohibit a Member from receiving free legal services, unless the Member establishes a Legal Expense Fund (“LEF”). According to the House Legislative Resource Center, Representative Nunes has not filed any of the required reports to establish an LEF. The relevant facts detailed below establish that the OCE Board should authorize an investigation of Representative Nunes. Representative Nunes’s overt involvement with the highly-publicized lawsuits threatens to establish a precedent that the Legal Expense Fund (“LEF”) regulations no longer apply to Members. Although Representative Nunes is entitled to legal representation and he may pursue any legal action to protect and defend his interests, he must comply with House rules. An OCE investigation will preserve Representative Nunes’s legal right to counsel while upholding well-established House rules and precedent. House Rules Prohibit Members from Receiving Discounted or Free Legal Services A Member of the House of Representatives “may not knowingly accept a gift” with limited exceptions.1 A “gift” is defined to include “a gratuity, favor, discount, entertainment, hospitality, loan, forbearance, or other item having monetary value.
  • San José State University Department of Political Science Pols 105: Congress, Spring 2019

    San José State University Department of Political Science Pols 105: Congress, Spring 2019

    San José State University Department of Political Science Pols 105: Congress, Spring 2019 Course and Contact Information Instructor: Garrick L. Percival Office Location: Clark Hall 453 Telephone: (408) 924-5553 Email: [email protected] Office Hours: Tues 1:30-3; Wed 11-12:30 (and by appointment) Class Days/Time: Tuesday and Thursday 10:30-11:45 Classroom: Clark Hall 303 Faculty Web Page and MYSJSU Messaging Course materials such as the syllabus, handouts, notes, assignment instructions, etc. can be found on the on Canvas Leaning Management System course login website at http://sjsu.instructure.com. You are responsible for regularly checking with the messaging system through MySJSU at http://my.sjsu.edu to learn of any updates. By enrolling in this course, you consent to all course requirements listed in this syllabus, published on our Canvas site, and announced in class. You accept responsibility for accessing the Canvas course website to download any required handouts, assignments, or readings. You also accept responsibility for checking the course website regularly for any announcements. You also accept responsibility for receiving any messages sent via the MySJSU email system. Make sure that MySJSU has your current email address. Please contact me within the first week if you cannot access the Canvas website, download and read .pdf files, link to other websites, or send or receive email. Course Description Examines politics and policymaking in the U.S. Congress. Topics include party leadership, interest groups in Congress, congressional committees, political representation, redistricting and congressional elections, party polarization, and the process of how a bill becomes law.
  • The Rules of #Metoo

    The Rules of #Metoo

    University of Chicago Legal Forum Volume 2019 Article 3 2019 The Rules of #MeToo Jessica A. Clarke Follow this and additional works at: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Clarke, Jessica A. (2019) "The Rules of #MeToo," University of Chicago Legal Forum: Vol. 2019 , Article 3. Available at: https://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol2019/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Chicago Unbound. It has been accepted for inclusion in University of Chicago Legal Forum by an authorized editor of Chicago Unbound. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Rules of #MeToo Jessica A. Clarke† ABSTRACT Two revelations are central to the meaning of the #MeToo movement. First, sexual harassment and assault are ubiquitous. And second, traditional legal procedures have failed to redress these problems. In the absence of effective formal legal pro- cedures, a set of ad hoc processes have emerged for managing claims of sexual har- assment and assault against persons in high-level positions in business, media, and government. This Article sketches out the features of this informal process, in which journalists expose misconduct and employers, voters, audiences, consumers, or professional organizations are called upon to remove the accused from a position of power. Although this process exists largely in the shadow of the law, it has at- tracted criticisms in a legal register. President Trump tapped into a vein of popular backlash against the #MeToo movement in arguing that it is “a very scary time for young men in America” because “somebody could accuse you of something and you’re automatically guilty.” Yet this is not an apt characterization of #MeToo’s paradigm cases.
  • The Follies of Democracy Promotion Leaders, Both Allies and Foes and Allies Leaders, Both Establishment, Policy World Foreign World

    The Follies of Democracy Promotion Leaders, Both Allies and Foes and Allies Leaders, Both Establishment, Policy World Foreign World

    A HOOVER INSTITUTION ESSAY ON MIDDLE EAST STRATEGY ChaLLENGES The Follies of Democracy Promotion THE AMERICAN ADVENTURE IN EGYPT SAMUEL TADROS “If you want to put Obama in a bad mood, tell him he has to go to a Situation Room meeting about Egypt.” This striking statement by an administration official appeared in an article accompanying Jeffrey Goldberg’s “The Obama Doctrine” in The Atlantic.1 Analyzing the president’s worldview, David Frum described him as a man disappointed with the world. America’s military leaders and foreign policy establishment, world leaders, both allies and foes—no one escaped the president’s ire at a world that had failed to live up to his expectations. In the flurry of analysis focusing on larger questions, the comment about Egypt received no attention. Such disregard was unfortunate. In a long list of Barack Obama’s disappointments, Egypt ranked high. Order International the and Islamism It was after all in that country’s capital that Obama had given his famed speech in 2009, promising a new beginning with the Muslim world. Less than two years later, the Egyptian people were lavishly praised from the White House’s podium. “Egyptians have inspired us,” declared a jubilant Obama on February 11, 2011. “The people of Egypt have spoken, their voices have been heard, and Egypt will never be the same.” Little did the president realize how ridiculous his statements would soon appear to be. Obama may have grown disappointed with Egypt, but he was hardly the only one. Democratic and Republican policymakers alike, foreign policy wonks and newspaper editorial boards, and even regular Americans found the country’s turn of events astonishing.
  • Gone Rogue: Time to Reform the Presidential Primary Debates

    Gone Rogue: Time to Reform the Presidential Primary Debates

    Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy Discussion Paper Series #D-67, January 2012 Gone Rogue: Time to Reform the Presidential Primary Debates by Mark McKinnon Shorenstein Center Reidy Fellow, Fall 2011 Political Communications Strategist Vice Chairman Hill+Knowlton Strategies Research Assistant: Sacha Feinman © 2012 President and Fellows of Harvard College. All rights reserved. How would the course of history been altered had P.T. Barnum moderated the famed Lincoln-Douglas debates in 1858? Today’s ultimate showman and on-again, off-again presidential candidate Donald Trump invited the Republican presidential primary contenders to a debate he planned to moderate and broadcast over the Christmas holidays. One of a record 30 such debates and forums held or scheduled between May 2011 and March 2012, this, more than any of the previous debates, had the potential to be an embarrassing debacle. Trump “could do a lot of damage to somebody,” said Karl Rove, the architect of President George W. Bush’s 2000 and 2004 campaigns, in an interview with Greta Van Susteren of Fox News. “And I suspect it’s not going to be to the candidate that he’s leaning towards. This is a man who says himself that he is going to run— potentially run—for the president of the United States starting next May. Why do we have that person moderating a debate?” 1 Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the 2008 Republican nominee for president, also reacted: “I guarantee you, there are too many debates and we have lost the focus on what the candidates’ vision for America is..
  • Curriculum Vitae Professor Shane Mitchell Greenstein the Martin Marshall Professor of Business Administration Harvard Business School Jan, 2021

    Curriculum Vitae Professor Shane Mitchell Greenstein the Martin Marshall Professor of Business Administration Harvard Business School Jan, 2021

    Curriculum Vitae Professor Shane Mitchell Greenstein The Martin Marshall Professor of Business Administration Harvard Business School Jan, 2021 Department address: Technology Operation and Management Morgan Hall 439 Harvard Business School Harvard University Boston, MA 02163 Contact Information: E-mail:[email protected] Phone: 617-384-7472 Fax: 617-384-4072 Publications Books and edited volumes 1. 2016, (and Josh Lerner and Scott Stern, editors) Innovation, Policy and the Economy, Volume 17, Special issue devoted to the economics of digitization. NBER conference volume, University of Chicago Press. 2. 2015, How the Internet Became Commercial: Innovation, Privatization, and the Birth of a new Network, Princeton University Press. http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10574.html. Winner of the 2016 Schumpeter Prize. 3. 2015, (and Avi Goldfarb and Catherine Tucker, Editors), Economic Analysis of the Digital Economy, NBER conference book, University of Chicago Press. 4. 2013, (and Avi Goldfarb and Catherine Tucker, Editors), The Economics of Digitization, Edward Elgar; Cheltenham, UK. 5. 2007 (and Victor Stango, Editors), Standards and Public Policy, Cambridge Press. Second edition (paperback), 2011. 6. 2006 (Editor), Computing. Edward-Elgar Press, UK. 7. 2004, Diamonds are Forever, Computers are Not, Economic and Strategic Management in Computing Markets, Imperial College Press: London. 1 8. 2002, (and Lorrie Cranor, Editors), Communications Policy and Information Technology: Promises, Problems, Prospects, MIT Press. 9. 2001, (and Ben Compaine, Editors), Communications Policy in Transition: The Internet and Beyond, MIT Press. Articles in Refereed Journals 1. 2021. (Ran Zhuo, Bradley Huffaker, kc Claffy), The Impact of the General Data Protection Regulation on Internet Interconnection. Telecommunication Policy, (Also NBER Working paper 2648.) 2.
  • Download Report

    Download Report

    COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS AN NUAL RE PORT JULY 1, 2003-JUNE 30, 2004 Main Office Washington Office The Harold Pratt House 1779 Massachusetts Avenue, NW 58 East 68th Street, New York, NY 10021 Washington, DC 20036 Tel. (212) 434-9400; Fax (212) 434-9800 Tel. (202) 518-3400; Fax (202) 986-2984 Website www.cfr.org E-mail [email protected] OFFICERS and DIRECTORS 2004-2005 OFFICERS DIRECTORS Term Expiring 2009 Peter G. Peterson* Term Expiring 2005 Madeleine K. Albright Chairman of the Board Jessica P Einhorn Richard N. Fostert Carla A. Hills* Louis V Gerstner Jr. Maurice R. Greenbergt Vice Chairman Carla A. Hills*t Robert E. Rubin George J. Mitchell Vice Chairman Robert E. Rubin Joseph S. Nye Jr. Richard N. Haass Warren B. Rudman Fareed Zakaria President Andrew Young Michael R Peters Richard N. Haass ex officio Executive Vice President Term Expiring 2006 Janice L. Murray Jeffrey L. Bewkes Senior Vice President OFFICERS AND and Treasurer Henry S. Bienen DIRECTORS, EMERITUS David Kellogg Lee Cullum AND HONORARY Senior Vice President, Corporate Richard C. Holbrooke Leslie H. Gelb Affairs, and Publisher Joan E. Spero President Emeritus Irina A. Faskianos Vice President, Vin Weber Maurice R. Greenberg Honorary Vice Chairman National Program and Academic Outreach Term Expiring 2007 Charles McC. Mathias Jr. Elise Carlson Lewis Fouad Ajami Director Emeritus Vice President, Membership David Rockefeller Kenneth M. Duberstein and Fellowship Affairs Honorary Chairman Ronald L. Olson James M. Lindsay Robert A. Scalapino Vice President, Director of Peter G. Peterson* t Director Emeritus Studies, Maurice R. Creenberg Chair Lhomas R.
  • Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy Discussion Paper Series

    Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy Discussion Paper Series

    Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public Policy Discussion Paper Series #D-64, June 2011 Disengaged: Elite Media in a Vernacular Nation1 By Bob Calo Shorenstein Center Fellow, Spring 2011 Graduate School of Journalism, UC Berkeley © 2011 President and Fellows of Harvard College. All rights reserved. Journalists, by and large, regard the “crisis” as something that happened to them, and not anything they did. It was the Internet that jumbled the informational sensitivities of their readers, corporate ownership that raised suspicions about our editorial motives, the audience itself that lacked the education or perspective to appreciate the work. Yet, 40 years of polling is clear about one thing: The decline in trust and the uneasiness of the audience with the profession and its product started well before technology began to shred the conventions of the media. In 1976, 72% of Americans expressed confidence in the news. Everyone knows the dreary trend line from that year onward: an inexorable decline over the decades.2 And if we fail to examine our part in the collapse of trust, no amount of digital re-imagining or niche marketing is going to restore our desired place in the public conversation. Ordinary working people no longer see media as a partner in their lives but part of the noise that intrudes on their lives. People will continue to muddle through: voting or not voting, caring or not caring, but many of them are doing it, as they once did, without the companionship of the press. Now elites and partisans don’t have this problem, there are niches aplenty for them.
  • Strategic Studies Quarterly, Fall 2011, Vol. 5, No. 3

    Strategic Studies Quarterly, Fall 2011, Vol. 5, No. 3

    We encourage you to e-mail your comments to us at: [email protected]. We encourage you to e-mail your comments to us at: [email protected]. Chief of Staff, US Air Force Gen Norton A. Schwartz Commander, Air Education and Training Command Gen Edward A. Rice Jr. Commandant, Air University Lt Gen David S. Fadok Director, Air Force Research Institute Gen John A. Shaud, PhD, USAF, Retired Col W. Michael Guillot, USAF, Retired, Editor L. Tawanda Eaves, Managing Editor CAPT Jerry L. Gantt, USNR, Retired, Content Editor Nedra O. Looney, Prepress Production Manager Betty R. Littlejohn, Editorial Assistant Sherry C. Terrell, Editorial Assistant Daniel M. Armstrong, Illustrator Editorial Advisors Gen John A. Shaud, PhD, USAF, Retired Gen Michael P. C. Carns, USAF, Retired Keith Britto Christina Goulter-Zervoudakis, PhD Colin S. Gray, PhD Robert P. Haffa, PhD Ben S. Lambeth, PhD John T. LaSaine, PhD Allan R. Millett, PhD Ayesha Ray, PhD Contributing Editors Air Force Research Institute Daniel R. Mortensen, PhD School of Advanced Air and Space Studies Stephen D. Chiabotti, PhD James W. Forsyth Jr., PhD The Spaatz Center Michael Allsep, PhD Edwina S. Campbell, PhD Charles E. Costanzo, PhD Christopher M. Hemmer, PhD Kimberly A. Hudson, PhD Col Basil S. Norris Jr., USAF, Retired Gary J. Schaub, PhD Strategic Studies Quarterly (SSQ) (ISSN 1936-1815) is published quarterly by Air University Press, Maxwell AFB, AL. Articles in SSQ may be reproduced, not for profit or sale, in whole or part without permission. A standard source credit line is required for each reprint. We encourage you to e-mail your comments to us at: [email protected].
  • In the Shadow of General Marshall-Old Soldiers in The

    In the Shadow of General Marshall-Old Soldiers in The

    In The Shadow of General Marshall: Old Soldiers in the Executive Branch Ryan Edward Guiberson Anaconda, Montana Bachelor of Science, United States Air Force Academy, 1992 Master of Arts-Political Science, University of Florida, 1994 A Dissertation presented to the Graduate Faculty of the University of Virginia in Candidacy for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Politics University of Virginia August, 2013 2 Abstract: The usurpation of political authority by tyrannical military figures is a theme that pervades the history of politics. The United States has avoided such an occurrence and the prospect of a military coup d’etat rarely registers as a realistic concern in American politics. Despite the unlikelihood of this classic form of military usurpation, other more insidious forms lurk and must be guarded against to protect civilian control of the military. One potential manifestation has been referred to as a military colonization of the executive branch. This form implies that retired senior military officers increasingly pursue executive branch positions and unduly promote the interests of the active duty military, its leaders, and military solutions to national security issues. This work addresses military colonization claims by examining the number of retired senior military officers that have served in executive branch positions, trends in where they participate, and their political behavior in these positions. It also uses interviews with retired senior military officers to gain their perspectives on the incentives and disincentives of executive branch service. The study concludes that in the post-Cold War period, participation rates of retired senior military officers in key executive branch positions do not diverge significantly from broader post-World War II patterns.
  • Lobbying Course Number: PMGT 6414 Credits: 3.00

    Lobbying Course Number: PMGT 6414 Credits: 3.00

    Lobbying– Prof. Julius Hobson – Page 1 of 18 M.P.S. in Political Management Spring Semester February 1, 2021 – April 15, 2021 Course Name: Lobbying Course Number: PMGT 6414 Credits: 3.00 Wednesdays: 7:10 pm – 9:10 pm Webex BASIC INFORMATION AND RESOURCES Instructor Julius W. Hobson, Jr., Adjunct Professor & Senior Policy Advisor, Polsinelli PC Contact Information Phone Number: (202) 626-8354 (o); (202) 364-8866 (h). Email Address: [email protected] Communication Office Hours: By appointment. Blackboard Site A Blackboard course site has been set up for this course. Each student is expected to check the site throughout the semester, as Blackboard will be the primary venue for outside classroom communications between the instructors and the students. Students can access the course site at https://blackboard.gwu.edu. Support for Blackboard is available at 202-994-4948 or helpdesk.gwu.edu. Academic Integrity All members of the university community are expected to exhibit honesty and competence in their academic work. Students have a special responsibility to acquaint themselves with, and make use of, all proper procedures for doing research, writing papers, and taking exams. Members of the community will be presumed to be familiar with the proper academic procedures and will be held responsible for applying them. Deliberate failure to act in accordance with such procedures will be considered academic dishonesty. Academic dishonesty is defined as “cheating of any kind, including misrepresenting one’s own work, taking credit for the work of others without crediting them and without appropriate authorization, and the fabrication of information.” Acts of academic dishonesty are a legal, moral, and intellectual offense against the community and will be prosecuted through the proper university channels.