Leading the way: Presidential leadership

0 comments

(CBS News) LEADING THE WAY is what we expect of our presidents. How successful any individual president has actually BEEN is a matter of debate historically, as is the entire question of what constitutes great leadership in the first place. Our Sunday Morning Cover Story is reported now by Barry Petersen:

We laugh with them, we cry with them . . . and with Hollywood's help from movies like "The American President," we heap on them our greatest expectations.



As Michael J. Fox's character said in that film, the public is "so thirsty for it they will crawl through the desert toward a mirage, and when they discover there is no water, they'll drink the sand."



Presidential leadership is Colorado College professor Thomas Cronin's specialty, and he is struck by America's perhaps too-perfect wish list for a president.



"It seems like an amalgam of wanting Mother Teresa, Mandela, Rambo, the Terminator and Spider-Man all wrapped into one," he said. "It's a pretty outlandish job description."



David McCullough has written extensively on our greatest presidents, among them, John Adams.



Adams wrote to his wife, Abigail, on his first night as president staying in what was then called the president's house, and some lines from that letter were carved into the mantelpiece of the State Dining Room of the White House, at the wish of Franklin Roosevelt: "May none but honest and wise men ever rule under this roof."



"I love that because you noticed he puts honest first, ahead of wise," said McCullough.



Why? "Because honesty is essential."



To McCullough, the great presidents shared a common set of qualities. "They had courage, and they had integrity, and they had patience, and they had determination."



Determination, like Teddy Roosevelt, who knew the Panama Canal would be good for American commerce and defense, helping American ships move from one ocean to the other -- and he got Americans to follow his vision.



"Unprecedented for us to do anything like that beyond our own borders [at] tremendous cost and a tremendous risk," said McCullough. "But He then participated in decisions, not just at the White House but by going to Panama to see things himself. First time a president left the country while in office."


And the best lead not only with actions, but with words.



One speech, like FDR's "We have nothing to fear, but fear itself," or Ronald Reagan's "Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall") could change history, said McCullough. "All superb speakers who delivered moving speeches. Speeches that lift us to want to attain higher achievement than we might believe we are capable of."



Like JFK's "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country."



"That's leadership," McCullough said.



John Kennedy's words launched David Gergen's career working for four presidents.



"I do believe that President Obama has to be the unifier-in-chief," he said.




Read More..

Obama to Be Sworn in for 2nd Term at White House

0 comments

Jan 20, 2013 8:43am







While an estimated 800,000 people are expected to gather in Washington D.C.  Monday to watch President Obama be sworn in for a second term, his second term officially begins Sunday. He will take his oath of office in a private ceremony. Vice President Joe Biden was sworn in on Sunday morning at the Naval Observatory.


OBAMA SWEARING-IN:


gty john roberts obama jef 120628 wblog Inauguration 2013: President Obama, Vice President Biden Swearing In Ceremonies

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. administers the oath of office a second time to President Barack Obama in the Map Room of the White House on Jan. 21, 2009. (Pete Souz / WH Photo / Getty Images)


–Obama will take the oath of office for a second term in a small ceremony in the Blue Room of the White House at 11:55 am. Chief Justice John Roberts will administer the oath.


–Obama will be sworn in using a Bible today that belonged to First Lady Michelle Obama’s grandmother, LaVaughn Delores Robinson. The Robinson family Bible was a present from the first lady’s father to his mother on Mother’s Day in 1958, six years before Michelle’s birth.


–Due to constitutionally-mandated scheduling, President Obama is set to become the second president in U.S. history to have four swearing-in ceremonies. Today will be his third. Obama was sworn in twice in 2008 out of an abundance of caution after Chief Justice John Roberts flubbed the oath of office.


Here is video of Obama’s first swearing in by Roberts:


And Here is audio of Roberts administering the oath for a second time in 2009:


–Franklin Roosevelt was also sworn-in four times but, unlike Obama, he was elected four times.


–This year will mark the seventh time a president has taken the oath on a Sunday and then again on Monday for ceremonial purposes. Reagan last took the oath on a Sunday in 1985.


PHOTOS: U.S. Presidents Taking the Oath of Office


BIDEN SWEARING-IN:


ap inaugural joe biden jt 130120 wblog Inauguration 2013: President Obama, Vice President Biden Swearing In Ceremonies

Carolyn Kaster/AP Photo


–Vice President Biden was sworn-in at the Vice President’s residence at the Naval Observatory, surrounded by his family and close friends.


–Biden personally selected Associate Justice Sotomayor, who will be the first Hispanic and fourth female judge to administer an oath of office.


–Three women have previously sworn-in presidents and vice presidents: Judge Sarah T. Hughes swore-in President Johnson in 1963; Justice Sandra Day O’Connor swore-in Vice President Dan Quayle in 1989; and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg swore-in Vice President Al Gore in 1997.


–On Sunday and Monday, Vice President Biden will be sworn in using the Biden Family Bible, which is five inches thick, has a Celtic cross on the cover and has been in the Biden family since 1893. He used it every time he was sworn in as a US Senator and when he was sworn in as Vice President in 2009. His son Beau used it when he was sworn in as Delaware’s attorney general.


Tune in to the ABC News.com Live page on Monday morning starting at 9:30 a.m. EST for all-day live streaming video coverage of Inauguration 2013: Barack Obama. Live coverage will also be available on the ABC News iPad App and mobile devices.



SHOWS: This Week World News







Read More..

Why Africa backs French in Mali

0 comments




























French-led Mali offensive


French-led Mali offensive


French-led Mali offensive


French-led Mali offensive


French-led Mali offensive


French-led Mali offensive


French-led Mali offensive


French-led Mali offensive


French-led Mali offensive


French-led Mali offensive


French-led Mali offensive


French-led Mali offensive


French-led Mali offensive


French-led Mali offensive


French-led Mali offensive


French-led Mali offensive


French-led Mali offensive


French-led Mali offensive


French-led Mali offensive


French-led Mali offensive


French-led Mali offensive


French-led Mali offensive





<<


<





1




2




3




4




5




6




7




8




9




10




11




12




13




14




15




16




17




18




19




20




21




22



>


>>







STORY HIGHLIGHTS


  • French intervention in Mali could be turning point in relationship with Africa, writes Lansana Gberie

  • France's meddling to bolster puppet regimes in the past has outraged Africans, he argues

  • He says few in Africa would label the French action in Mali as 'neo-colonial mission creep'

  • Lansana: 'Africa's weakness has been exposed by the might of a foreign power'




Editor's note: Dr. Lansana Gberie is a specialist on African peace and security issues. He is the author of "A Dirty War in West Africa: The RUF and the Destruction of Sierra Leone." He is from Sierra Leone and lives in New York.


(CNN) -- Operation Serval, France's swift military intervention to roll back advances made by Jihadist elements who had hijacked a separatist movement in northern Mali, could be a turning point in the ex-colonialist's relationship with Africa.


It is not, after all, every day that you hear a senior official of the African Union (AU) refer to a former European colonial power in Africa as "a brotherly nation," as Ambroise Niyonsaba, the African Union's special representative in Ivory Coast, described France on 14 January, while hailing the European nation's military strikes in Mali.


France's persistent meddling to bolster puppet regimes or unseat inconvenient ones was often the cause of much outrage among African leaders and intellectuals. But by robustly taking on the Islamist forces that for many months now have imposed a regime of terror in northern Mali, France is doing exactly what African governments would like to have done.



Lansana Gberie

Lansana Gberie



This is because the Movement for Unity and Jihad in West Africa (MUJAO), Ansar Dine and al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) are a far greater threat to many African states than they ever would be to France or Europe.


See also: What's behind Mali instability?


Moreover, the main underlying issues that led to this situation -- the separatist rebellion by Mali's Tuareg, under the banner of the National Movement for the Liberation of Azawad (MNLA), who seized the northern half of the country and declared it independent of Mali shortly after a most ill-timed military coup on 22 March 2012 -- is anathema to the African Union and the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS).


Successful separatism by an ethnic minority, it is believed, would only encourage the emergence of more separatist movements in a continent where many of the countries were cobbled together from disparate groups by Europeans not so long ago.










But the foreign Islamists who had been allies to the Tuaregs at the start of their rebellion had effectively sidelined the MNLA by July last year, and have since been exercising tomcatting powers over the peasants in the area, to whom the puritanical brand of Islam being promoted by the Islamists is alien.


ECOWAS, which is dominated by Nigeria -- formerly France's chief hegemonic foe in West Africa -- in August last year submitted a note verbale with a "strategic concept" to the U.N. Security Council, detailing plans for an intervention force to defeat the Islamists in Mali and reunify the country.


ECOWAS wanted the U.N. to bankroll the operation, which would include the deployment a 3,245-strong force -- to which Nigeria (694), Togo (581), Niger (541) and Senegal (350) would be the biggest contributors -- at a cost of $410 million a year. The note stated that the objective of the Islamists in northern Mali was to "create a safe haven" in that country from which to coordinate "continental terrorist networks, including AQIM, MUJAO, Boko Haram [in Nigeria] and Al-Shabaab [in Somalia]."


Despite compelling evidence of the threat the Islamists pose to international peace and security, the U.N. has not been able to agree on funding what essentially would be a military offensive. U.N. Security Council resolution 2085, passed on 20 December last year, only agreed to a voluntary contribution and the setting up of a trust fund, and requested the secretary-general "develop and refine options within 30 days" in this regard. The deadline should be 20 January.


See also: Six reasons events in Mali matter


It is partly because of this U.N. inaction that few in Africa would label the French action in Mali as another neo-colonial mission creep.


If the Islamists had been allowed to capture the very strategic town of Sevaré, as they seemed intent on doing, they would have captured the only airstrip in Mali (apart from the airport in Bamako) capable of handling heavy cargo planes, and they would have been poised to attack the more populated south of the country.



Africa's weakness has, once again, been exposed by the might of a foreign power.
Lansana Gberie



Those Africans who would be critical of the French are probably stunned to embarrassment: Africa's weakness has, once again, been exposed by the might of a foreign power.


Watch video: French troops welcomed in Mali


Africans, however, can perhaps take consolation in the fact that the current situation in Mali was partially created by the NATO action in Libya in 2010, which France spearheaded. A large number of the well-armed Islamists and Tuareg separatists had fought in the forces of former Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi, and then left to join the MNLA in northern Mali after Gadhafi fell.


They brought with them advanced weapons, including shoulder-launched anti-aircraft missiles from Libya; and two new Jihadist terrorist groups active in northern Mali right now, Ansar Dine and MUJAO, were formed out of these forces.


Many African states had an ambivalent attitude towards Gadhafi, but few rejoiced when he was ousted and killed in the most squalid condition.


A number of African countries, Nigeria included, have started to deploy troops in Mali alongside the French, and ECOWAS has stated the objective as the complete liberation of the north from the Islamists.


The Islamists are clearly not a pushover; though they number between 2,000 and 3,000 they are battle-hardened and fanatically driven, and will likely hold on for some time to come.


The question now is: what happens after, as is almost certain, France begins to wind down its forces, leaving the African troops in Mali?


Nigeria, which almost single-handedly funded previous ECOWAS interventions (in Liberia and Sierra Leone in the 1990s, costing billions of dollars and hundreds of Nigerian troops), has been reluctant to fund such expensive missions since it became democratic.


See also: Nigerians waiting for 'African Spring'


Its civilian regimes have to be more accountable to their citizens than the military regimes of the 1990s, and Nigeria has pressing domestic challenges. Foreign military intervention is no longer popular in the country, though the links between the northern Mali Islamists and the destructive Boko Haram could be used as a strategic justification for intervention in Mali.


The funding issue, however, will become more and more urgent in the coming weeks and months, and the U.N. must find a sustainable solution beyond a call for voluntary contributions by member states.


The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Lansana Gberie.






Read More..

One Connect launched in Bishan-Toa Payoh Constituency

0 comments





SINGAPORE: The Bishan-Toa Payoh Group Representation Constituency is the latest to get a one-stop service for private estate residents to call.

Called One Connect, the residents can use the helpline if they are unsure which agency to contact when there are estate maintenance issues.

Defence Minister Ng Eng Hen launched the service on Saturday, along with fellow Members of Parliament for the constituency.

Managed by the People's Association, One Connect also aims to promote community bonding programmes by driving the formation of interest groups.

The service has already been introduced in other estates like Nee Soon, Ang Mo Kio, and Marine Parade.

The People's Association hopes to have One Connect rolled out island-wide by March 2013.

- CNA/fa



Read More..

Will Obama's new methods be better?

0 comments



President Obama announces his administration's new gun law proposals Wednesday.




STORY HIGHLIGHTS


  • David Gergen: Since re-election, Obama seems smarter, tougher, bolder

  • He says president outmanuevered opponents on taxes, key appointments

  • Did Obama miss an opportunity to work cooperatively with GOP, Gergen asks

  • Gergen: Conservatives fear Obama is trying to run over them




Editor's note: David Gergen is a senior political analyst for CNN and has been an adviser to four presidents. A graduate of Harvard Law School, he is a professor of public service and director of the Center for Public Leadership at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government. Follow him on Twitter. Watch CNN's comprehensive coverage of President Barack Obama's second inauguration this weekend on CNN TV and follow online at CNN.com or via CNN's apps for iPhone, iPad and Android.


(CNN) -- On the eve of his second inaugural, President Obama appears smarter, tougher and bolder than ever before. But whether he is also wiser remains a key question for his new term.


It is clear that he is consciously changing his leadership style heading into the next four years. Weeks before the November elections, his top advisers were signaling that he intended to be a different kind of president in his second term.



David Gergen

David Gergen



"Just watch," they said to me, in effect, "he will win re-election decisively and then he will throw down the gauntlet to the Republicans, insisting they raise taxes on the wealthy. Right on the edge of the fiscal cliff, he thinks Republicans will cave."


What's your Plan B, I asked. "We don't need a Plan B," they answered. "After the president hangs tough -- no more Mr. Nice Guy -- the other side will buckle." Sure enough, Republicans caved on taxes. Encouraged, Obama has since made clear he won't compromise with Republicans on the debt ceiling, either.


Foreman: My last letter to the president


Obama 2.0 stepped up this past week on yet another issue: gun control. No president in two decades has been as forceful or sweeping in challenging the nation's gun culture. Once again, he portrayed the right as the enemy of progress and showed no interest in negotiating a package up front.



In his coming State of the Union address, and perhaps in his inaugural, the president will begin a hard push for a comprehensive reform of our tattered immigration system. Leading GOP leaders on the issue -- Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Florida, for example -- would prefer a piecemeal approach that is bipartisan. Obama wants to go for broke in a single package, and on a central issue -- providing a clear path to citizenship for undocumented residents -- he is uncompromising.


After losing out on getting Susan Rice as his next secretary of state, Obama has also shown a tougher side on personnel appointments. Rice went down after Democratic as well as Republican senators indicated a preference for Sen. John Kerry. But when Republicans also tried to kill the nomination of Chuck Hagel for secretary of defense, Obama was unyielding -- an "in-your-face appointment," Sen. Lindsay Graham, R-South Carolina, called it, echoing sentiments held by some of his colleagues.


Will Obama's second inauguration let America turn the page?


Republicans would have preferred someone other than Jack Lew at Treasury, but Obama brushed them off. Hagel and Lew -- both substantial men -- will be confirmed, absent an unexpected bombshell, and Obama will rack up two more victories over Republicans.



His new style is paying off politically. But in the long run, will it also pay off in better governance?
David Gergen



Strikingly, Obama has also been deft in the ways he has drawn upon Vice President Joe Biden. During much of the campaign, Biden appeared to be kept under wraps. But in the transition, he has been invaluable to Obama in negotiating a deal with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell on the fiscal cliff and in pulling together the gun package. Biden was also at his most eloquent at the ceremony announcing the gun measures.


All of this has added up for Obama to one of the most effective transitions in modern times. And it is paying rich dividends: A CNN poll this past week pegged his approval rating at 55%, far above the doldrums he was in for much of the past two years. Many of his long-time supporters are rallying behind him. As the first Democrat since Franklin D. Roosevelt to score back-to-back election victories with more than 50% of the vote, Obama is in the strongest position since early in his first year.


Smarter, tougher, bolder -- his new style is paying off politically. But in the long run, will it also pay off in better governance? Perhaps -- and for the country's sake, let's hope so. Yet, there are ample reasons to wonder, and worry.


Avlon: GOP's surprising edge on diversity






Ultimately, to resolve major issues like deficits, immigration, guns and energy, the president and Congress need to find ways to work together much better than they did in the first term. Over the past two years, Republicans were clearly more recalcitrant than Democrats, practically declaring war on Obama, and the White House has been right to adopt a tougher approach after the elections.


But a growing number of Republicans concluded after they had their heads handed to them in November that they had to move away from extremism toward a more center-right position, more open to working out compromises with Obama. It's not that they suddenly wanted Obama to succeed; they didn't want their party to fail.


House Speaker John Boehner led the way, offering the day after the election to raise taxes on the wealthy and giving up two decades of GOP orthodoxy. In a similar spirit, Rubio has been developing a mainstream plan on immigration, moving away from a ruinous GOP stance.


One senses that the hope, small as it was, to take a brief timeout on hyperpartisanship in order to tackle the big issues is now slipping away.


Zelizer: Second-term Obama will play defense


While a majority of Americans now approve of Obama's job performance, conservatives increasingly believe that in his new toughness, he is going overboard, trying to run over them. They don't see a president who wants to roll up his sleeves and negotiate; they see a president who wants to barnstorm the country to beat them up. News that Obama is converting his campaign apparatus into a nonprofit to support his second term will only deepen that sense. And it frustrates them that he is winning: At their retreat, House Republicans learned that their disapproval has risen to 64%.


Conceivably, Obama's tactics could pressure Republicans into capitulation on several fronts. More likely, they will be spoiling for more fights. Chances for a "grand bargain" appear to be hanging by a thread.


Two suspicions are starting to float among those with distaste for the president. The first is that he isn't really all that committed to bringing deficits under control. If he were, he would be pushing a master plan by now. Instead, it is argued, he will tinker with the deficits but cares much more about leaving a progressive legacy -- health care reform, a stronger safety net, green energy, and the like.


Politics: Second inaugural address puts Obama in select company


Second, the suspicion is taking hold that he is approaching the second term with a clear eye on elections ahead. What if he can drive Republicans out of control of the House in 2014? Then he could get his real agenda done. What if he could set the stage for another Democrat to win the presidency in 2016? Then he could leave behind a majority coalition that could run the country for years, just as FDR did. Democrats, of course, think the real point is that Obama is finally showing the toughness that is needed.


We are surely seeing a new Obama emerge on the eve of his second term. Where he will now lead the country is the central question that his inaugural address and the weeks ahead will begin to answer.


Follow @CNNOpinion on Twitter.


Join us at Facebook/CNNOpinion.


Will you be attending President Obama's inauguration weekend? Be a part of CNN iReport and Instagram's special inauguration project!


The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of David Gergen.






Read More..

Fiery Orioles manager Earl Weaver dead at 82

0 comments

BALTIMORE Earl Weaver, the fiery Hall of Fame manager who won 1,480 games with the Baltimore Orioles seemingly was engaged in nearly as many arguments with umpires, has died. He was 82.



Dick Gordon, Weaver's marketing agent, said Saturday that Weaver died while on a Caribbean cruise sponsored by the Orioles. Gordon said Weaver's wife told him that Weaver went back to his cabin after dinner and began choking between 10:30 and 11 Friday night. Gordon said a cause of death has not been determined.



The Duke of Earl, as he was affectionately known in Baltimore, took the Orioles into the World Series four times over 17 seasons but won only one title, in 1970. His .583 winning percentage ranks fifth among managers who served 10 or more seasons in the 20th century.



"Earl Weaver stands alone as the greatest manager in the history of the Orioles organization and one of the greatest in the history of baseball," Orioles owner Peter Angelos said. "This is a sad day for everyone who knew him and for all Orioles fans. Earl made his passion for the Orioles known both on and off the field. On behalf of the Orioles, I extend my condolences to his wife, Marianna, and to his family."



Weaver was a salty-tongued manager who preferred to wait for a three-run homer rather than manufacture a run with a stolen base or a bunt. While some baseball purists argued that strategy, no one could dispute the results.



"He was an intense competitor and smart as a whip when it comes to figuring out ways to beat you," said Davey Johnson, who played under Weaver in the minor leagues and with the Orioles from 1965 to 1972.



Weaver had a reputation as a winner, but umpires knew him as a hothead. Weaver would often turn his hat backward and yell directly into an umpire's face to argue a call or a rule, and after the inevitable ejection he would more often than not kick dirt on home plate or on the umpire's shoes.



He was ejected 91 times, including once in both games of a doubleheader.


Asked once if his reputation might have harmed his chances to gain entry into the Hall of Fame, Weaver admitted, "It probably hurt me."



Those 91 ejections were overshadowed by his five 100-win seasons, six AL East titles and four pennants. Weaver was inducted into the Hall in 1996, 10 years after he managed his final game with Baltimore at the end of an ill-advised comeback.



In 1985, the Orioles' owner at the time, Edward B. Williams, coaxed Weaver away from golf to take over a struggling squad. Weaver donned his uniform No. 4, which had already been retired by the team, and tried to breathe some life into the listless Orioles.



Baltimore went 53-52 over the last half of the 1985 season, but finished seventh in 1986 with a 73-89 record. It was Weaver's only losing season as a major-league manager, and he retired for good after that.



"If I hadn't come back," Weaver said after his final game, "I would be home thinking what it would have been like to manage again. I found out it's work."



Weaver finished with a 1,480-1,060 record. He won Manager of the Year three times.



"I had a successful career, not necessarily a Hall of Fame career, but a successful one," he said.


1/2


Read More..

Inauguration to Cost Millions But Total Price Unclear

0 comments












How much will all the inaugural events cost? It's hard to say.


While most events that occur in the capital have a hard-and-fast budget, the inauguration's many moving parts, safety concerns and large geographic reach make it hard to quantify – especially before the main event.


In 2009, ABC reported the total cost of Obama's first inauguration was $170 million. While incumbent presidents historically spend less on a second inauguration, it's unclear what the total bill will be this time around. Analysis of some of the known appropriations so far puts the total at $13.637 million, but it will no doubt be a much larger price tag when everything is accounted for.


RELATED: 12 Things You Didn't Know About the Inauguration


One of the main chunks missing from this year's tab is the budget for the Presidential Inaugural Committee – the group responsible for using donated money to put together this year's celebrations, including National Day of Service, the Kids' Inaugural Concert, the Parade and the Inaugural Balls.


In 2009, the PIC collected more than $53 million in donations, according to a report filed with the Federal Elections Commission 90 days after the inauguration.






Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images











Politically Dressed: Inauguration First Daughters Watch Video









While enthusiasm for the inauguration was running higher that year, it is possible the PIC will haul in more money this time around, as they have eliminated some of the self-imposed regulations on the kinds of donations they can accept. For his first inauguration, President Obama did not take money from corporations or gifts that exceeded $50,000.


In 2013, his committee did away with those rules. PIC spokesman Brent Colburn would not say why the change took place, insisting that each committee operates independently from the precedent set by the inaugurations before – even if staff like Colburn are repeats on the committee from 2009.


RELATED: Inauguration Weekend: A Star-Powered Lineup


The PIC also won't say how much they have already collected or even what their goal was. Colburn explained that these are "moving budgets," which won't stabilize until after the inauguration.


They have, however, released the names of donors on their website weekly. As of Friday afternoon, they were up to 993 donors.


Another leg of the costs is covered by the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies. They take care of the swearing-in ceremony and the Congressional luncheon. For those events they have a total budget of $1.237 million, down by about $163,000 from 2009. Whereas the PIC budget comes from donations, the American taxpayers foot the bill for the JCCIC.


Beyond those two inauguration-focused groups, there are a myriad of broader organizations that spend money on the inauguration as well.


RELATED: Plenty of Room at the Inns for 2013 Inauguration


A Congressional Research Service report from December says the government spent $22 million reimbursing local and state governments and the National Park Service for their participation in the 2009 inauguration, but that figure is low. The D.C. government alone received twice that amount, according to the mayor's office. Officials from D.C., Maryland and Virginia estimated their total need to be $75 million.


NPS got an appropriation from Congress of $1.2 million so far this year, according to communications officer Carol Johnson, and another $1.4 million went to the U.S. Park Police.






Read More..