This photo has been hugely popular so we thought we'd run it again.
Despite it's stunning shape the storm that helped create it also had a deadly side killing at least 115 people.
The tropical storm battered Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador over the weekend, officials in those countries reported.
Guatemala was hit hardest, with at least 92 deaths, 54 people missing and 59 injured, emergency officials said. Nearly 112,000 people have been evacuated and more than 29,000 areliving in temporary shelters, Guatemalan President Alvaro Colom said in an address to the nation late Sunday.
The devastation has been widespread throughout Guatemala with mudslides destroying homes and buildings and burying some victims. At least nine rivers have dramatically higher levels and 13 bridges have collapsed, the nation's emergency services said. The office of Guatemala's president handed out this aerial view of a crater that opened up after Agatha hit
In the northern part of Guatemala City, the downpour created a giant sinkhole that swallowed up a space larger than the area of a street intersection. Residents told CNN that a three-story building and a house fell into the hole.
A local newspaper reported that a private security guard was killed when the sinkhole opened up, but authorities had not confirmed the fatality. Residents said that a poor sewage drainage system underground was to blame for the sinkhole. A similar hole opened up nearby last year, they said.
Classes have been canceled this week throughout the nation.
In Honduras, where 14 people have died, President Porfirio Lobo declared a state of emergency Sunday.
Nearly 3,500 people have been evacuated from their homes and nearly 3,300 are living in shelters, the Honduran emergency agency said Monday. More than 140 homes have been destroyed and another 700 have been damaged, the Permanent Commission for Emergencies reported.
The situation in El Salvador, where nine people died, was improving Monday, officials said. The rain stopped Sunday afternoon and river levels were beginning to diminish, officials said. Classes nationwide remained canceled, however, until further notice.
More rain was possibly forecast for Monday, though, and Salvadoran officials said they were closely monitoring the situation.
Agatha was demoted from a tropical storm to a tropical depression Saturday night and lost its status as a depression Sunday evening.
It was the first named storm for the Pacific hurricane season. The Atlantic hurricane season starts Tuesday.
- CNN.COM
This isn't the first time Guatemala has had a sinkhole - in 2007 one killed at least 3 people.
2007 Sinkhole
Pitcher handles missed call with grace and compassion
The only saving grace to Armando Galarraga being robbed of a perfect game by a blown call was that after the mistake had been made the principal parties involved acted with a certain amount of grace.
The Detroit Tigers right-hander threw a perfect game on Wednesday night against the Cleveland Indians, but he won't get official credit for it, because first-base umpire Jim Joyce blew a call on what should have been the final out of the game.
With two outs and Galarraga on the verge of pitching immortality, Indians shortstop Jason Donald hit a grounder wide of first. Tigers first baseman Miguel Cabrera fielded the ball, and tossed to Galarraga covering first. Galarraga beat Donald to the bag. Cabrera's throw beat Donald to the bag. Donald was out. The perfect game had been completed.
But no, Joyce umpiring at first base called Donald safe. The perfect game had turned into the perfect storm. Instead of Galarraga's perfect game being remembered, an umpire's human error would be endlessly recalled.
To Joyce's credit, he directly owned up to the mistake.
"It was the biggest call of my career and I kicked the [stuff] out of it," he said. "I just cost that kid a perfect game after he pitched his [behind] off all night."
"I had a great angle and I missed the call. I really thought [Donald] beat the ball. At that time, I thought he beat the ball. After I heard from the Tigers, who had obviously seen a replay, I asked the guy in the room to cue up the play as soon as we got in here, and I missed it from here to that wall."
Joyce asked to meet with Galarraga after the game to offer him a personal apology. Tigers president/general manager Dave Dombrowski brought Galarraga from the Tigers' clubhouse to the umpire's room to meet with Joyce. Throughout this ordeal, Galarraga has demonstrated a level of dignity that was as admirable as his pitching had been. Another man might have ranted and raved for several weeks. Galarraga had to be extraordinarily disappointed, but he made no public show of outrage. And then he graciously accepted Joyce's apology.
"He understands," Galarraga said. "I give him a lot of credit for coming in and saying, 'Hey, I need to talk to you to say I'm sorry.' That doesn't happen. You don't see an umpire after the game come out and say, 'Hey, let me tell you I'm sorry.' He apologized to me and he felt really bad. He didn't even shower. He was in the same clothes. He gave me a couple hugs.
"I know nobody's perfect. What are you going to do? I was mad in the moment because I was nervous. I didn't know what to do. I was like celebrating. Then I looked at him.
"He apologized. He feels really bad. Nobody is perfect," Galarraga said. "What am I gonna do? His body language said more than a lot of words. His eyes were watery, he didn't have to say much. His body language said a lot."
Joyce, a 22-season Major League veteran, and, apart from this incident, a respected umpire, understood that he was going to be in for some serous criticism.
"I don't blame the Tigers for anything that was said after the game," Joyce said. "If I had been Galarraga, I would have been the first one in my face and he never said a word to me. I don't blame one person for their reaction."
One person who was in Joyce's face was Tigers manager Jim Leyland, who went out immediately after the call was made for an explanation/argument and resumed the argument after the final out. But later, Leyland cooled down and offered a helpful, healing perspective.
"That's the nature of the business, that's just the way it is," Leyland said. "The players are human. The umpires are human. The managers are human. The writers are human. We all make mistakes. It's a crying shame. Jimmy's a real good umpire, has been for a long time. He probably got it wrong."
The missed call was a real low point for baseball, an epic performance; a perfect game pitched by Galarraga erased by human error, an umpire's error. Both Galarraga and baseball were deprived of history and the injustice rankled.
And yet, the aftermath of human error included all the parties involved displaying some admirable human qualities. Joyce seemed to be truly penitent. Galarraga acted with consistent grace and dignity. Leyland had enough generosity of spirit to offer kind, consoling words for the umpire.
The human mistake would not be erased; the injustice would not be reversed. But the aftermath offered some displays of human dignity that reminded us not of a major mistake but of baseball's best traits.
Mike Bauman is a national columnist for MLB.com. This story was not subject to the approval of Major League Baseball or its clubs.
DETROIT -- The first starting pitcher cut from Tigers camp this spring was a blown call away from the first perfect game in franchise history.
For Armando Galarraga, Wednesday's one-hit shutout that should've been far more was just the start of his mixed emotions. When asked after the gem for his reaction, he basically had to shrug.
He's well-known in the Tigers clubhouse for his card tricks. He had to feel like he got tricked out of history in a 3-0 win over the Indians.
"I don't know," Galarraga said. "I'm happy and sad. I don't know."
He didn't know how to react to the call, and neither did many people. Many watching from afar, though, didn't know how to react to Galarraga pitching this way in the first place.
The closest the Tigers have gotten to a perfect game was Kevin Costner. He played the fictional pitcher Billy Chapel in the 1999 movie "For Love of the Game," which revolves around Chapel tossing a perfect game in his final start. In reality, Wednesday could be the start that finally gets Galarraga's career rolling.
He led the Tigers in victories as a rookie in 2008 after coming over in a Minor League trade, but was out of the rotation by the stretch run of the American League Central race last fall. Galarraga had manager Jim Leyland raving about him over the winter, his hope renewed by a healthy arm and a brief winter ball stint, but his struggles to attack hitters made him the first starting candidate sent to the Minors in Spring Training.
The Tigers skipped him in the rotation last weekend for Max Scherzer, and team officials had to decide whether to keep him or Dontrelle Willis among the starting five. Galarraga's previous outing was a relief appearance last Saturday to help him get the feel for his slider.
Wednesday's outing raised a lot of questions around the game, but it answered a big one about Galarraga.
"I want to thank this whole organization for believing in me," he said.
By no means did the Tigers believe he could do something like this. If anyone had a chance to pitch a perfect game in Detroit, the first guess would be Justin Verlander, who threw a no-hitter in 2007. Scherzer might've entered the conversation after he struck out 14 batters over 5 2/3 innings Sunday.
By contrast, the Tigers were simply looking for quality outings from Galarraga. To get there, they were looking for strikes.
Galarraga's previous start was a May 22 loss at Dodger Stadium in which he paid for some hanging sliders that Leyland called "just spinning." He threw an extended side session in the bullpen a week ago at Seattle with a focus on improving his slider, his workhorse pitch, and his sinker.
Pitching coach Rick Knapp didn't know Galarraga had this good of stuff, but he knew he had something good going when he watched Galarraga warm up in the bullpen before Wednesday's game.
"He's the one who put the work in," Knapp said. "He's the one that did what was necessary. He took some small things that I told him and he worked them to the Nth degree."
Galarraga missed with his first two pitches of the night to rookie leadoff man Trevor Crowe. He didn't have another two-ball count until he had two outs in the fourth. He didn't face a three-ball count until Travis Hafner ran the count full leading off the fifth.
"He was just getting in a rhythm," rookie catcher Alex Avila said. "He was in a rhythm all game. You get that first-pitch strike and you can throw whatever you want up there. He did a great job today in that aspect."
Time and again, Galarraga had Indians hitters swinging at the pitches he wanted them to chase, and hitting them for outs. More often than not, they did it early in counts.
"My sinker and my fastball," Galarraga said. "I was just throwing fastball, fastball, fastball on the corners, corners, corners and it was moving really well."
Normally, that fastball hits 92-93 mph on the radar gun. Once Knapp saw 94 and 95 popping up on the Comerica Park scoreboard, he sensed something was special.
It caught the Indians completely by surprise.
"He established his fastball the first time through our order," Indians manager Manny Acta said. "After that, he started throwing that good slider that he has. I think our hitters were looking for that slider early in the game and never saw it until late. He did a good job keeping the ball down, every one of them, and made our guys pound the ball into the ground the whole night. He deserves a lot of credit."
The pitch counts were astounding -- nine in the opening inning, 10 each in the second, third and fifth, eight in the sixth and six in the seventh. Galarraga's high counts until the ninth were an 11-pitch fourth and eighth.
Face just 24 batters through eight innings, and the pitch count is going to be low. Still, Galarraga entered the ninth with just 75 pitches thrown.
By then, he was well aware of what was going on.
"Coming into the eighth, I got out of the inning really quick," Galararaga said. "I was like, 'You've got this.'"
He had plenty of time to himself to think about it in the dugout. He was at the far end; everybody else was closer to the stairs.
"Nobody talked to me," Galarraga said. "But you got the feeling everybody in the dugout was like, 'Leave him alone and let him do his thing he was doing every inning.'"
Galarraga went out for the ninth looking to do the same thing, get ahead in the count on Mark Grudzielanek. But the 38-year-old Grudzielanek surprised him by swinging at the first pitch and driving it to left-center field. What could've been a confidence-shatterer turned into a boost with Austin Jackson's over-the-shoulder catch.
"When Jackson made that play," Galarraga said, "I was like, 'Come on, Armando, finish what you start.' For myself, I know I finished."
Galarraga needed two outs for the first perfect game by a Tigers hurler, and the first for a Venezuelan-born player. Mike Redmond's grounder to short brought it down to one out.
Galarraga made a mad dash to first base to cover the bag when Miguel Cabrera ventured out to field Jason Donald's ground ball. When first-base umpire Jim Joyce ruled he didn't get to the bag in time, the emotion on Galarraga poured out.
"He was telling me that after the call he was so nervous over the last couple innings of the game that he didn't know how to react," Avila said.
Instead, he just smiled.
"I think it's a nervous thing," Galarraga said. "I'm so nervous, I smile. You see that play, I was nervous. I didn't know whether to smile or punch [Joyce]. It would be worse if I punched him, so I'm happy I smiled.
"I know nobody's perfect. What are you going to do? I was mad in the moment because I was nervous. I didn't know what to do. I was like celebrating. Then I looked at him."
Galarraga was emotionally numb, but he wasn't finished. He still had an out left to go, and he still had a shutout. Leyland had closer Jose Valverde warmed up, but he wouldn't have dared, not at that point.
Galarraga could've easily come apart after that. Instead, he threw five more pitches, got a groundout from Crowe, and got his win.
"I don't know what happened," Galarraga said. "I just threw one strike and a slider and something like that. I didn't even think. I just threw the ball and tried to get out of the game."
Jason Beck is a reporter for MLB.com. This story was not subject to the approval of Major League Baseball or its clubs.
Major League Baseball sources with direct knowledge of the meeting confirm that key members of baseball's hierarchy were to convene this morning in New York to review the circumstances of Umpire Jim Joyce's erroneous "safe" call at first base in Detroit, which last night denied the Tigers' Armando Galarraga what would have been the 21st Perfect Game in baseball history and the third in just 25 days.
There was considerable doubt that Commissioner Bud Selig felt he could or should intervene in overturning the results of an umpire's on-the-field ruling. The Detroit News reported that the Tigers might be contacting MLB in hopes of remedying what umpire Joyce later admitted, clearly and emotionally, was a wildly incorrect call. The News quoted Tigers' General Manager Dave Dombrowski as saying "I wouldn't get into telling you what I would do. That's a private matter. He shouldn't have missed it. It's a shame for the kid..."
Baseball sources said that as of late morning, the Tigers' opponents, the Cleveland Indians, had not contacted the Commissioner's office. Their support of any change to last night's call might be a key factor.
"This isn't a call," Joyce said afterwards, "this is a history call. And I kicked the **** out of it, and nobody feels worse than I do...I took a perfect game away from that kid."
Jon Heyman of Sports Illustrated and MLB Network tweeted that Commissioner Selig was "involved" and his office would have a statement at some point today.
Some in the Commissoner's office were to urge Selig to declare that with Joyce's admission, the 27th out of the game was recorded when Cleveland's Jason Donald grounded out, first baseman Miguel Cabrera to pitcher Galarraga, covering first. The base hit credited to Donald, and the following at bat, by Cleveland's Trevor Crowe, would be wiped off the books and thus Galarraga would be credited with a perfect game.
There is precedent for the Commissioner's Office to decide what is, and isn't, a perfect game. On September 4, 1991, a so-called "Statistical Accuracy Committee" ruled that the game would only official recognize as perfect games, ones in which pitchers retired 27 (or more) consecutive batters and completed the game without a batter reaching first base. The ruling wiped off the books the 1959 game in which Harvey Haddix of Pittsburgh pitched 12 perfect innings, only to lose the game to Milwaukee on a base hit. It also erased the 1917 game in which then-pitcher Babe Ruth of the Boston Red Sox had walked the lead off batter, then been ejected by the umpire for arguing the call. Reliever Ernie Shore entered the game with none out and that runner on first, who was promptly caught stealing. Shore then retired the 26 batters he faced, and had, at the time of the Commissioner's Office ruling, been credited with a perfect game for more than 74 years. 48 more no-hit games were also erased by the re-definition of the rules.
There are also countless instances of umpires' on-field decisions being reviewed and even overruled by the now dormant offices of the Presidents of the American and National League. One such review confirmed a controversial "out" ruling that ultimately decided the 1908 NL pennant. More recently, in 1983, after Kansas City's George Brett had hit a two-out, 9th inning home run to bring his team from behind to ahead in a game in New York, umpire Tim McClelland determined that Brett had broken the rules by having the gripping substance "pine tar" further up his bat than rules permitted. McClelland nullified Brett's home run and called him out for the final out of the game. Within days, American League President Lee MacPhail had overruled McClelland, declared the home run valid, and ordered the game replayed, more than a month later, from the point directly after Brett's home run.
Today, as it has been for a century, American politics is an argument between two Princetonians -- James Madison, Class of 1771, and Woodrow Wilson, Class of 1879. Madison was the most profound thinker among the Founders. Wilson, avatar of "progressivism," was the first president critical of the nation's founding. Barack Obama's Wilsonian agenda reflects its namesake's rejection of limited government.
Lack of "a limiting principle" is the essence of progressivism, according to William Voegeli, contributing editor of the Claremont Review of Books, in his new book "Never Enough: America's Limitless Welfare State." The Founders, he writes, believed that free government's purpose, and the threats to it, are found in nature. The threats are desires for untrammeled power, desires which, Madison said, are "sown in the nature of man." Government's limited purpose is to protect the exercise of natural rights that pre-exist government, rights that human reason can ascertain in unchanging principles of conduct and that are essential to the pursuit of happiness.
Wilsonian progressives believe that History is a proper noun, an autonomous thing. It, rather than nature, defines government's ever-evolving and unlimited purposes. Government exists to dispense an ever-expanding menu of rights -- entitlements that serve an open-ended understanding of material and even spiritual well-being.
The name "progressivism" implies criticism of the Founding, which we leave behind as we make progress. And the name is tautological: History is progressive because progress is defined as whatever History produces. History guarantees what the Supreme Court has called "evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society."
The cheerful assumption is that "evolving" must mean "improving." Progressivism's promise is a program for every problem, and progressivism's premise is that every unfulfilled desire is a problem.
Franklin Roosevelt, an alumnus of Wilson's administration, resolved to "resume" Wilson's "march along the path of real progress" by giving government "the vibrant personal character that is the very embodiment of human charity." He repudiated the Founders' idea that government is instituted to protect pre-existing and timeless natural rights, promising "the re-definition of these rights in terms of a changing and growing social order."
He promised "a right to make a comfortable living." Presumably, the judiciary would define and enforce the delivery of comfort. Specifically, there could be no right to "do anything which deprives others" of whatever "elemental rights" the government decides to dispense.
Today, government finds the limitless power of dispensing not in Madison's Constitution of limited government but in Wilson's theory that the Constitution actually frees government from limitations. The liberating -- for government -- idea is that the Constitution is a "living," evolving document. Wilson's Constitution is an emancipation proclamation for government, empowering it to regulate all human activities in order to treat all human desires as needs and hence as rights. Unlimited power is entailed by what Voegeli calls government's "right to discover new rights."
"Liberalism's protean understanding of rights," he says, "complicates and ultimately dooms the idea of a principled refusal to elevate any benefit that we would like people to enjoy to the status of an inviolable right." Needs breed rights to have the needs addressed, to the point that Lyndon Johnson, an FDR protege, promised that government would provide Americans with "purpose" and "meaning."
Although progressivism's ever-lengthening list of rights is as limitless as human needs/desires, one right that never makes the list is the right to keep some inviolable portion of one's private wealth or income, "regardless," Voegeli says, "of the lofty purposes social reformers wish to make of it."
Lacking a limiting principle, progressivism cannot say how big the welfare state should be but must always say that it should be bigger than it currently is. Furthermore, by making a welfare state a fountain of rights requisite for democracy, progressives in effect declare that democratic deliberation about the legitimacy of the welfare state is illegitimate.
"By blackening the skies with crisscrossing dollars," Voegeli says, the welfare state encourages people "to believe an impossibility: that every household can be a net importer of the wealth redistributed by the government." But the welfare state's problem, today becoming vivid, is socialism's problem, as Margaret Thatcher defined it: Socialist governments "always run out of other people's money."
Wilsonian government, meaning (in Wilson's words) government with "unstinted power," is hostile to Madison's Constitution, which, Madison said, obliges government "to control itself." Thus our choice is between government restraint rooted in respect for nature, or government free to follow History wherever government says History marches.
Over the past few weeks, medical organizations and health care providers have come out againstArizona’s new immigration law, citing the likelihood that it will discourage a large segment of the population from seeking health care. Yesterday, however, Lucas Restrepo, M.D., published a piece in the New England Journal of Medicine that provided a whole new angle on the effect SB-1070 will have on the medical profession. Restrepo points out that, under the law, health care providers who treat undocumented immigrants could be considered criminals:
The new Arizona state immigration bill (SB-1070) signed into law on April 23 will seriously obstruct, if not undermine, the practice of medicine in the state of Arizona. It specifies that those who “conceal, harbor or shield or attempt to conceal, harbor or shield” a foreign person who came to the United States illicitly “are guilty of a class 1 misdemeanor” punishable by a fine of at least $1,000 (Sec. 5, Section 13-2929). It can be argued that health care providers who neglect to report illegal immigrants under their care will violate the law and be considered criminals. [...]
Asking patients to produce immigration documents violates the trust that physicians, nurses, and other health care workers endeavor to earn from them. This bill threatens one of the oldest traditions of medicine: physicians shall protect patients regardless of nationality or race. This legislation, if unchallenged, will force health care providers to choose between the dignity of their profession and the indignity of violating the law.
In his column, Restrepo notes the bill provides physicians (and police for that matter) with no criteria when it comes to what constitutes “reasonable grounds” to suspect that someone is undocumented. As a result, he worries that “health care providers in Arizona will need to ask for a passport before seeing certain patients (and providers themselves will need to carry their own passports at all times, depending on their physical appearance or accent).”
Studies have shown that, on average, immigrants are healthier than US citizens, use less medical care, use less expensive care, and do not impose a disproportionate financial burden on the U.S. health care system. However, accidents can happen to anyone and everyone gets sick at some point. Discouraging or denying treatment of undocumented immigrants in such incidents doesn’t just hurt them, it puts everyone at risk. According to experts, health care access to any population could lead to a health crisis that affects everyone.
Wonk Room previously reported that Dr. Winston Wong — Medical Director of community benefit at Kaiser Permanente — has gone as far as to argue that doctors have a professional obligation to oppose any measure that endangers the care of their patients and the public’s general health, including SB-1070. Last month, medical organizations representing more than 156,000 health care providers released astatement blasting Arizona’s new immigration law, calling it “an affront to human rights and a devastating step backwards for the health and well being of the entire nation.”
Alabama Republican Rep. Parker Griffith was soundly defeated in a Republican primary tonight, the second party switcher to lose an intraparty fight in the past two weeks.
Madison County Commissioner Mo Brooks had 51 percent of the vote to Griffith's 33 percent and 16 percent for Les Phillip with 99 percent of precincts reporting. Although the Associated Press had not called the race, local media reported that Griffith had conceded the contest to Brooks.
Griffith, who had been elected as a Democrat to the northern Alabama 5th district, switched parties last year with promises from House Republican leaders that they would back him to the hilt.
But, he struggled to convince Republican primary voters that he was one of them; he was battered over his vote for Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) as House Speaker at the start of the 111th Congress, for example.
Griffith's problems were a mirror image of Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter's (D) difficulties in his primary loss to Rep. Joe Sestak on May 18.
Griffith joins Rep. Alan Mollohan (D-W.Va.) as House members to lose their re-nomination bids. In the Senate, Specter as well as Sen. Bob Bennett (R-Utah) have come up short in intraparty bids and Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) faces a runoff race on June 8 against Lt. Gov. Bill Halter.
Alabama Democrats showed a similar resistance to establishment favorites in the governor's race.
Alabama Agriculture Commissioner Ron Sparks crushed Rep. Artur Davis in the Democratic primary for governor, ending Davis' hopes of becoming the state's first black governor.
"We worked hard, we fussed hard, we cried hard," Sparks said. "Thank you for allowing me to be in the position I'm in."
The Associated Press called the race for Sparks shortly before 11 pm eastern time and Sparks holding a lead of nearly 30 points.
Davis had long been touted as a star on the national stage but his insistence on opposing President Barack Obama's agenda in a failed attempt to keep himself viable in a general election coupled with his long-running feud with the state's unelected black leaders combined to make his showing a major disappointment.
Rick Dent, campaign manager for Sparks, told the Fix that Davis' vote against President Obama's health care legislation "hurt him in the African-American community."
The Republican gubernatorial race is headed to a July 13 runoff. Former state Sen. Bradley Byrne secured one of the spots but businessman Tim James and state Rep. Robert Bentley were separated by less than 300 votes in the fight for the second slot. Two hundred miles to the west, national Republicans got some good news as Mississippi state Sen. Alan Nunnelee won the GOP nomination in the 1st district without a runoff.
Nunnelee took 51 percent of the vote in the race against former Europa Mayor Henry Ross and Fox News Channel commentator Angela McGlowan. McGlowan placed a distant third despite a last-minute endorsement from former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin -- via Twitter!
Nunnelee will face Rep. Travis Childers (D) in the fall in a district that gave Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) 62 percent of the vote in 2008 and that will be a major GOP pickup target this fall.
Across the country in New Mexico, Dona Ana District Attorney Susana Martinez cruised to a victory in the GOP primary for governor.
"Susana Martinez's historic nomination is great news for New Mexico," said Republican Governors Association spokesman Tim Murtaugh. "
Martinez will face Lt. Gov. Diane Denish, who was unopposed for the Democratic nomination, in the fall. With Felicia Sonmez
by Faiz Shakir, Amanda Terkel, Matt Corley, Benjamin Armbruster, Zaid Jilani, Max Bergmann, and Alex Seitz-Wald
Yesterday, the White Houseunveiled a new National Security Strategythat will serve to guide America's approach to the world. It signals a sharp break from the previous administration whose unilateral, reckless, and ideologically-driven policies left America isolated, overstretched, and weaker. This strategy outlines a clear vision that reflects thethe last decadeof progressive thought; it demonstrates a comprehension of the geopolitical landscapeand of the challenges confronting the United States and the world; and it firmly states that America remains a country at war and determined to eliminate al Qaeda. But importantly, this strategy does not conflate or confuse these threats. Like the national security strategy produced by the Center for American Progress in 2009, "Integrating Security," the strategy recognizes the complex nature of the challenges and the need to use all elements of our power, not just our military, but diplomatic, economic, and cultural tools as well to combat them. Ultimately, this is a strategyabout maintaining and enhancing American power and influence. But maintaining America's global strength and position as global leader does not mean working to weaken or aggressively confront other rising powers, such as China, India, and Brazil, because global order is not a "zero sum game." The strategy stipulates that the U.S. is undeniably the world's global leader, but as such its objective must be to work to build a stronger rule-based international order to address global challenges, to get others to do more, and to further global prosperity. The strategy also firmly recognizes America's global strengthstems from its strength at homeand that the U.S. must always strive to live up to the values and principles that has made America so admired around the world. Brookings Institution President Strobe Talbott said it is "the most comprehensive National Security Strategy ever." Yet, while the strategy lays out the path, the challenge will be to follow it.
REJECTING WHAT FAILED: The new strategy "aims to draw contrasts with President Bush's 2006 version" that adopted a unilateralist bent, advocated preventive war, poorly defined or understood the America's terrorist enemies, and furthered a foreign policy approach that was overly reliant on the American military. The Bush administration's approach left America's military forces stretched, alliances frayed, and image tarnished around the world. U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice noted that the new strategy "is a rather dramatic departurefrom the most recent prior national security strategy." On the use of military force, the strategy rejects the reckless approach of preventive war: "while the use of force is sometimes necessary,we will exhaust other options before warwhenever we can, and carefully weigh the costs and risks of action against the costs and risks of inaction." And when it is necessary, the U.S. "will seek broad international support." While President Bush overstretched our armed forces and American tax payers, this new strategy as the New York Times notes, "describes a coming era in which the United Stateswill have to learn to live within its limits-- a world in which two wars cannot be sustained for much longer and the rising powers inevitably begin to erode some elements of American influence around the globe." The new strategy also demonstrates a much clearer comprehension of the nature of 21st century threats, as Matt Duss explains, "[O]ne of the starkest differencesbetween the Obama administration's new National Security Strategy and the Bush administration's is its tighter focus on Al Qaeda and affiliated extremists, and its recognition that responding to Al Qaeda with fear and overreaction is playing right into Al Qaeda's hands."
AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM: The strategy laid out by the Obama administration firmly recognizes that the United States is without a doubt the world's most powerful and influential country, but to maintain America's exceptional status, the U.S. needs a strategy designed to maintain and enhance America's power and influence. the Washington Independent's Spencer Ackerman assesses that "every single focus outlined in the National Security Strategy isabout the maintenance of American poweron the international stage" in an era of rising powers and transnational threats. In this new more multipolar world, the United States must work to build "a rules-based international system that can advanceour own interests by serving mutual interests. International institutions must be more effective and representative of the diffusion of influence in the 21st century. Nations must have incentives to behave responsibly, or be isolated when they do not." As Joe Cirincione of the Ploughshares Fund notes, this approach on strengthening the international system and isolating outliers "offers abetter chance of containing the Iranian nuclear programthan the more unilateralist pursuits of the George W. Bush administration." One of the principle differences in the new strategy is the understanding that one of the central goals of U.S. foreign policy must be to shape "an international order capable of overcoming the challenges of the 21st century." Addressing transnational threats like terrorism, climate change, and nuclear proliferation require gaining the support and buy-in of others, as these challenges cannot be unilaterally solved. This approach clearly understands that the United States cannot do everything, making it critical to get others to do more to share the burden of maintaining the global order. As CAP'sBrian Katulis and Nina Hachigian argue, "Today, conservatives talk about an outdated conception of power -- saying that to be safe, the United States must dominate the world. Stuck in a 19th-century mind-set, many conservatives view international rules and institutions as an entangling web of interdependence designed to constrain U.S. freedom of action. ... From this perspective, Washington must alone assume responsibility for global security. ... The new national security strategy will emphasize the importance of getting other countries -- especially emerging powers -- to pull their weight when it comes to these shared problems."
FOLLOW THROUGH:While the strategy lays out a decidedly progressive approach to national security, the real test will come in the months and years ahead. In Iraq andAfghanistan, the new strategy argues the U.S. cannot engage in these wars indefinitely, the administration will have tostick to its strategytotransfer authorityto local forces and withdraw American troops. The strategy says that America will increasingly have to live within its means, but that will also meanmore seriously confronting bloated defense spendingat the Pentagon andrebalancing national security spending. In order to stay true to American values and the rule of law, as the strategy insists is vital for maintaining America's moral authority, the administration will have toactually close Guantanamo. On terrorism, the administration must take continue to take vigorousaction to prevent global and homegrown terrorist threat, while at the same time pushing back against thosecalling for discrimination and racial-profiling. It must also resist approaches thatenhance state powerat the expense civil liberties. To confront the growing threat of climate change, the administration mustcontinuously push for far reaching action. On Middle East peace, the administration must remain engaged, even-handedly pushing both sidestoward a two-state solution. Whileprogress has been achievedto eliminate thedanger from nuclear weapons, the harder steps are yet to come. Finally, the administration must be ready to work multilaterally to solve global challenges even when it's difficult. As Obama said, "We will promote these values above all by living them -- through our fidelity to the rule of law and our Constitution,even when it's hard; and through our commitment to forever pursue a more perfect union."
by Faiz Shakir, Amanda Terkel, Matt Corley, Benjamin Armbruster, Brad Johnson, Zaid Jilani, and Alex Seitz-Wald
Thirty-eight days after BP's Deepwater Horizon rig exploded and killed eleven workers, fifteen to 40 million gallons of toxic crude have spewed into the Gulf of Mexico. Oil from the slick now equals the size of South Carolina and has soiled more than 100 miles of Louisiana's coastline. Fishermen working on the cleanup have "become ill after working long hours near waters fouled with oil and dispersant," reporting "nausea, dizziness, headaches and chest pains." The federal government is "going to bring every resource necessary to put a stop" to the catastrophe, President Obama said yesterday during a visit to a solar panel manufacturing facility in Fremont, CA. "We will not rest until this well is shut, the environment is repaired, and the cleanup is complete." There may be reason for hope on the first element. U.S. Coast Guard Adm. Thad Allen, the top federal official overseeing the response, said this morning he is optimistic that the "top kill" -- the latest effort to shut down BP's blown out well -- is working. Unfortunately, the toxic sludge in Louisiana's fragile wetlands, the slick on the open ocean, and the toxic plumes of dispersed oil underwater are continuing to kill marine wildlife and birds at a terrifying clip. The ongoing investigations into the causes of the disaster are revealing new evidence of decisions to ignore on-site workers and instead take safety risks in order to save costs, and a top BP worker who was aboard the Deepwater Horizon has invoked the Fifth Amendment. Recognizing the national importance of forestalling yet more disasters, Obama today will ban new deepwater wells for six months, cancel exploratory drilling in Alaska, and cancel a "proposed lease sale off the Virginia coast."
IS BP TOO BIG TO CARE?: BP's attitude toward the Gulf catastrophe resembles the shrugs of Wall Street firms who caused the near collapse of the global economy. BP Chief Operating Officer Doug Suttles has expressed his optimism that both his company and the Gulf will "will fully recover," even though Prince William Sound has yet to "fully recover" 21 years after the Exxon Valdez spill. Likewise, BP CEO Tony Hayward -- who received a 40 percent pay raise last year to about $5.8 million -- said he believes the "environmental impact of this disaster is likely to be very, very modest" because the Gulf of Mexico is a "very big ocean." BP Chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg said his company is a "big and important company for the US" and expects that BP will be able to "move on," although its "reputation will be tarnished." Financial analyst Tom Nelson believes BP's stock drop "is a fantastic opportunity to buy a very high quality long-term business on a very cheap rating." Center for American Progress senior fellow Joseph Romm called BP "the Goldman Sachs of big oil" because of its spotty safety record, insistence on voluntary "trust me" self-regulation, and willingness to cut corners to "save a few bucks." The moral hazard created by privatized profit and socialized risk has allowed bankers to cripple our economy and energy companies to destroy our planet. Ten days ago, MSNBC anchor Chris Matthews lashed out at the consequences of "unbridled free enterprise," wondering why the President doesn't "nationalize that industry and get the job done."
RE-EMPOWERING GOVERNMENT: "[T]he truth is that we have disempowered government and handed vast responsibilities over to a private sector that will never see protecting the public interest as its primary task," Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne worries. In addition to the efforts to stop the leaks, BP controls claims processing, environmental contractors on land and sea, volunteer assistance, access to the disaster site, and data collection. Over the past month, the federal government has let BP block attempts to monitor the gusher, study the undersea plumes, or learn about the dispersants being used. Democratic strategist and Louisiana resident James Carville told CNN on Wednesday that Obama "needs to tell BP 'I'm your daddy, I'm in charge, you're going to do what we say.'" Obama should make it clear that BP is no longer the final decision maker -- about anything," Huffington Post columnist Dan Froomkin writes. "He should also establish that nobody in government is taking anything BP says on face value anymore." The Center for American Progress' Tom Kenworthy and Brad Johnson recommend that the federal government explicitly take command authority away from BP and mobilize the full resources of the government. The Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to bar BP from new federal contracts -- including drilling in federally controlled oil fields -- because of its repeated environmental crimes. The federal government should require BP to use its first quarter 2010 profits -- $5 billion -- to establish the escrow account to pay for the disaster response.
FREEDOM FROM BIG OIL: "Even if you hadn't seen the catastrophe down in the Gulf, the reason that folks are now having to go down a mile deep into the ocean, and then another mile drilling into the ground below, that is because the easy oil fields and oil wells are gone, or they're starting to diminish," Obama said Tuesday. "That tells us we've got to have a long-term energy strategy in this country." Congress and the administration must take further steps to end our dependence on big oil. The administration should beef up federal research and development efforts into how to prevent oil spills and better contain them if they occur. The federal government should establish additional protection for continental shelf areas beyond just the three miles states can control. CAP and environmental organizations advocate establishing a significant oil savings reduction goal and empowering the president to achieve it. Obama and Congress should also adopt measures for cleaner vehicles and fuels, and more investment in transit -- as part of a comprehensive plan to reduce oil use. Congress should cut tax loopholes and other handouts to big oil companies, which would save $45 billion over 10 years -- money that can be spent on investing in a clean energy economy instead. And clean energy legislation that caps the oil and coal pollution that is destroying our atmosphere and oceans is long overdue. "We all know the price we pay as a country," Obama said. "With the increased risks and increased costs, it gives you a sense of where we're going. We're not going got be able to sustain this kind of fossil fuel use. This planet can't sustain it."
Over the past few weeks, medical organizations and health care providers have