Prodroom delivers to NPR's Robert Krulwich

New Santa Barbarian Jade Blackwater was our guest in The Production Room studio for an ISDN connection with National Public Radio science reporter Robert Krulwich.

So how many trees are there for each person on the planet?
NASA knows.

And what are we doing with all those trees?
Find out by listening to this story that aired today on Morning Edition.

As a side note, Some mornings when Susan and I wake up on the farm one of us will look out of our bedroom window and say, "See those trees? They're mine." This picture was taken in September at the farm.

For more please click on this link to Dunn Creek Farm

NAFTA: Revised or Reinterpreted?

What will President Obama mean to Canadians? Ask most Canadians and after polite expressions off relief you'll likely hear speculation about NAFTA.

Former Canadian UN Ambassador Paul Heinbecker is interviewd in this link to a Q and A with Doug Fisher of Canwest News Service published Saturday,November 8th in the Ottawa Citizen.

Q. But what about Obama's vow to reopen NAFTA?

A. Obama and a Democratic Congress might very well open up those labour and environmental provisions of the trade agreement that Obama talked about during the primaries, but there are a lot of Canadians who wouldn't mind that at all. So long as the Americans come at it recognizing that the closest they are ever going to come to energy independence is by co-operating with Canada, I think we could negotiate a pretty good outcome. It's been a long time, nearly 20 years, since the treaty was on the table, and there are plenty of items that could be added or adjusted. None of that really terrifies me.

This is exactly what I heard from Canadians on the East Coast. Ambassador Heinbecker is correct about the benefits for both sides in re-examining NAFTA and there are several other reasons why a reinterpretation of NAFTA will reveal the abuse of the treaty terms by the Bush administration and could restore the intent of the treaty.

There have been times during the last few years when CBC reported mumblings about a withdrawal from NAFTA after US intransigence on trade issues. The softwood lumber fight and a series of border closings related to beef and potatoes left Canada pissed off. Endless US appeals of legal decisions favoring Canada's trade position made some ready to quit. A reinterpretation of NAFTA in Washington could solve some of the problems immediately.

And the US electorate (and our media) should take note of the following comment:

"Canada is the Americans' largest supplier of oil, petroleum products, gas electricity and uranium. And I think significant markets could be found for those elsewhere, if necessary. The Americans know that. So it doesn't make economic sense. Nor does it make sense strategically for the U.S. to force Canada to seek other markets, like China, for resources."

Ummm yeah. We import more energy from Canada than we do from Saudi Arabia. And we get a pretty good deal on energy under NAFTA.

Did I Mention Change in Iran?

It was only yesterday that I suggested change could be brought about by soft power as a result of the US election.

While it's still early and dangerous to suggest that a major shift is already under way, I found this interesting story from Borzou Daragahi in today's LA Times online linked to the Huffington Post:

Iran Economists Denounce Ahmedinejad's Policies


Seems that the Iranian President is taking more domestic flack from nascent opposition to his government's standard of bellicose nationalism.

Now, to be fair, Iran has unhappily found itself centered between hostile forces in destabilized countries on two of it's borders. It's only natural for the Iranian government to focus on nationalist themes in the face of a serious threat.

But when your own economists contradict your leadership in an international forum and you start reading this:

In a 30-page letter quoted by several newspapers and state-run television and published on the website of the independent Iranian Labor News Agency, the economists say Iran is in dire economic straits and must drastically change course. The letter also says Ahmadinejad's "tension-creating" foreign policy has "scared off foreign investment and inflicted heavy damage" on the economy.

"Meager economic growth, widespread jobless rate, chronic and double-digit inflation, crisis in capital markets, government's expansionary budget, disturbed interaction with the world, inequity and poverty have combined with the global economic downturn to leave undeniably big impacts on exports and imports," the letter says.

Ahmadinejad immediately blasted back, contending at a seminar on economic development that Iran has been "least affected by this international financial crisis" and urging economists to design "an independent economic system and model based on justice," according to the official Islamic Republic News Agency.

A man like President Ahmedinejad has got to be a little concerned about his fellow conservative ideologues and their ability to hold on to power. He knows that his people realize that America has peacefully overthrown it's own hard liners.

The president of Iran and many in his government are veterans of the Iranian revolution and no doubt command respect among older and conservative people. I wonder what the feeling is among young Iranians who don't remember the revolution but do like democracy.

More from the LA Times:

The letter and its publication suggest that Ahmadinejad and his clique face growing discontent among Tehran's elite political circles ahead of the presidential election in June.

The negative assessment flies in the face of recent bragging about Iran's economy by religious leaders, some of whom have described the West's economic downturn as God's revenge.

Sound familiar? Religious fundamentalists are the same in any language.

In America, we've just passed through our own democratic process - 22 months of fear against hope.

Now I wonder what the Iranian people hope for this June?

President Obama and the Return of Soft Power

I'm not the first to notice this factor and I'll post some links below which we can examine together since I have not yet read other articles on this topic.

It's a good think piece for this first Sunday after the election.

I'll keep my comments focused on one example so we can move on to what the real thinkers think and you can compare my take with theirs.

Imagine for a moment that you are a citizen of Tehran, Iran. You may not have been out dancing in the streets last Tuesday night but you certainly know who Barack Obama is and you know that he has peacefully overthrown the American government by winning a decisive democratic vote of confidence from the American people.

You know that Obama risked his candidacy by expressing his willingness to resolve conflicts in the interest of peace.

Consider what this means to Iran's president Ahmadinijad, whose own government has been recently been rocked by scandal. Consider the superficially gracious and yet slightly pointed letter he sent to president elect Obama regarding future discussions.

President Ahmadinijad now faces the problem of appearing belligerent in the face of democratic principle and reason. He faces the risk of placing his tenuous hold on government against a world leader who is probably now more popular in his own country (especially among young people) than he is. He and others in the establishment could face a newly energized electorate chanting "Yes We Can" on the streets as they work to further their own Democracy.

This is how President Barack Obama can win the peace we all seek with soft power.

George Bush attempted to impose American will with military might. But ironically Barack Obama and America, with new democratic allies everywhere, are in a position to use this election to drive the change that doesn't come from a gun.

America has shown that all of us are free to rise up and shout, "YES WE CAN".

Ahmadinijad

Joseph Nye - Barack Obama and Soft Power

Joseph Nye II

Galen Fox - Capitalism + Democracy = Peace

The Year of Jubilo

Kingdom Coming
(Henry Clay Work)

Say, darkeys, hab you seen de massa,
Wid de muff-stash on his face,
Go long the road some time dis mornin'
Like he gwine to leab de place?
He seen a smoke, 'way up the ribber
Whar the Linkum gunboats lay;
He took his hat an' lef' berry sudden
An' I spec he's run away!

cho: De massa run? Ha ha!
De darkeys stay? Ho ho!
It mus' be now de kingdom comin'
An' de year ob Jubilo!

Henry Clay Work was a white abolitionist from Connecticut. The song is based on a published parody of runaway slave ads which were widely published in all of the states before the Civil War. The joke here is that "massa" ran away from the Federal Army and the slaves he left behind are offering to take him back.

Headlines from "The Change"
Here are some of the latest dispatches from the front:

Sarah We Hardly Knew Ye
The long knives are already out...


The battle is on for control of what's left of the Conservative coalition. Obviously there are some who don't want Sarah Palin to be the face of the party in 2012.

Man The Lifeboats!

Nice summary of Rush Limbaugh comments yesterday

"The conservative movement does not need to be rebuilt," he said. "We had some people abandon the conservative movement, and they need to be abandoned."

Someone might mention to Rush that he could be the one cut loose in the purge that is surely underway. Rush flogged for McCain (after trying to destroy him in the primaries). He lobbied hard for Palin and now wants no responsibility for damaging the coalition that won elections. He labored mightily for conservatism and failed. So why does he have a new contract? Stay tuned while you can. There are going to be stations leaving the EIB.

Where Does This Leave The Christian Coalition?
They really should have seen this coming. They were patronized by the Republicans in exchange for political influence. And they sure don't like anyone being critical of their political activism as Michelle Goldberg found out when she published:

Kingdom Coming - The Rise of Christian Nationalism

Apparently large numbers have found Jesus again and are done rendering elections to a Caesar who never delivered on their agenda.

CALIFORNIA'S PROP 8 - Legalized Discrimination

The Christians and Catholics and Mormons (you'll notice that Christians even discriminate against each other) poured millions of out of state dollars into a vote on a constitutional amendment in my home state of California. How's that grab you? Not since the Supreme Court nullified free state constitutions(Dred Scott)has their been such an abuse of States Rights.

The battle will go back to the court and this amendment will not pass a civil liberties test. It will wind up in the US Supreme Court which has jurisdiction over individual rights under Federal Law. The conservatives may have created the unintended consequence of taking this issue out of the hands of the states and putting it squarely into the hands of Federal courts who will have to rule on this in the context of human rights.

De oberseer he make us trouble, an' he dribe us round a spell;
We lock him up in de smoke house cellar, wid de key t'rown in de well.
De whip is lost, de han'-cuff broken, but de massa'll hab his pay;
He's ole enough, big enough, ought to known better, dan to went, an' run away.
De massa run? ha, ha! De darkey stay? ho, ho!
It mus' be now de kingdom comin', an' de year ob Jubilo!

Obama Speech on Election Night

A New Reality is Coming

A senior Republican Adviser to President George W. Bush was interviewed by Ron Suskind. This excerpt from Suskind's report tells us a great deal about the people and the mindset of the out-going American President and his administration. It also may be key to understanding why Americans will break the Republican hold on government tomorrow.

In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn't like about Bush's former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House's displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn't fully comprehend -- but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.

The aide said that guys like me were ''in what we call the reality-based community,'' which he defined as people who ''believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.'' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ''That's not the way the world really works anymore,'' he continued. ''We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.''

Excerpt from:
Faith, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush
By RON SUSKIND


Published: October 17, 2004

Amazingly, this report explains so much about where we are on the eve of this election.

Why are we so hungry for change?
Why was a faith based know-nothing picked for VP?

Read this article and then vote.

If you're not American, read this article and then watch the election returns tomorrow. I promise it will make viewing more interesting.

The terms of political discussion in America have changed. The framing of political issues and American foreign policy are about to be re-modeled.

America's conservatives find themselves unable to persuade the populace with the language and ideology they have become addicted to.

Barack Obama is a master of modern political campaigning.

I read this article when it was first published and have seen it quoted and misquoted repeatedly. I post it here, in hopes that it will help make this touchstone bit of reporting on the George W. Bush Presidency more readily available.