Really?

Sorry I've been away. Real life gets in the way at times.

More later, but this just caught my eye. Iran has banned the soccer players who wore green armbands in solidarity with their home country's election protesters. An odd intersection of sports and real life, and a very upsetting decision.

Going All In.

(Image Courtesy of AssociatedContent.com)

I've often seen these people, these squares at the table, short stack and long odds against them. All their outs gone. One last card in the deck that can help them. I used to wonder how they could let themselves get into such bad shape, and how the hell they thought they could turn it around.

-Mike McDermott - "Rounders"

If you were in college, or even late in high school, when "Rounders" premiered in theaters, chances are you caught the poker bug. Soon, every young adult with a few dollars in his pocket and a dream started organizing Friday night poker games, with nothing but a deck of cards and a dream of making it big. The poker explosion today? With TV coverage of the World Series of Poker, poker games televised on multiple channels on multiple days a week, and celebrities entering every poker tournament they can? I think, and I'm not the only one that thinks this, it all started with "Rounders."

In the movie, Poker Philosopher/Law Student/Delivery Truck Driver Mike McDermott (played by Matt Damon) delivers a number of memorable lines. One of which I quoted above. See, poker is a game of forcing someone at your table to make a decision with their chips...you force them to decide whether or not to risk it all. In the quote above, McDermott describes the individual seen at poker tables across the country, probably right now. The player who has seen the game get away from them, and before they know it, they're forced to put everything on the line with just one card, one play, offering them a chance for survival.

In Iran, we have just reached that moment.

This morning, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatullah Ali Khamenei gave a speech. In the speech, Khamenei defined the election results as "definitive," and without fraud. He called on the protesters to stop their protesting, and to accept the results as they currently stand. Further, his speech was not without threats to the protesters:

The street is the place of living and trading. Why are you taking to the streets? We have had the election. Street demonstrations are a target for terrorist plots. Who would be responsible if something happened?

If this were a poker game, Khamenei has just gone all in. He cannot back down now. The protesters have forced his hand, and Khamenei is much like the player at the table McDermott describes: Wondering how in the world he got to this point, and praying the final card that turns over is the only one that can save him.

On Leadership

(Image Courtesy of the University of Virginia)

Back in April, my wife and I were lucky enough to travel to London my my parents, my brother and his fiance. My parents, who were so generous as to cover the cost associated with this trip, did so in part because London is one of their favorite cities in their world, and they wanted to share this with their children.

During a wonderful week in this city, we spent some time at the Winston Churchill Museum and the Cabinet War Rooms. Located near St. James's Park, 10 Downing Street and Westminster Abbey, the Cabinet War Rooms house the secret bunkers in which Churchill lived during the London Blitz. From these hidden, secret corridors Churchill helped steel the resolve of the British people, and the world.

The terror of Nazi fascism, and the strength necessary to stem its advance, were forecast by Churchill in a speech delivered 69 years ago today, to the House of Commons. Known today as the "Finest Hour" speech, it is one of the more famous of Churchill's, and is worth remembering today.

What General Weygand called the Battle of France is over. I expect that the Battle of Britain is about to begin. Upon this battle depends the survival of Christian civilization. Upon it depends our own British life, and the long continuity of our institutions and our Empire. The whole fury and might of the enemy must very soon be turned on us.

Hitler knows that he will have to break us in this Island or lose the war. If we can stand up to him, all Europe may be free and the life of the world may move forward into broad, sunlit uplands. But if we fail, then the whole world, including the United States, including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science.

Let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that if the British Empire and its Commonwealth last for a thousand years, men will still say, 'This was their finest hour.'

Indeed, it was their finest hour.

Meddling, Continued

Ta-Nehisi Coates, another great writer over at The Atlantic, wades into the issue of what President Obama should or should not say with respect to the situation in Iran. Coates, in my opinion, strikes the right note when he concludes:

Moreover, I remain suspicious of bluster. It seems to me that part of realism, perhaps the most important part, is understanding your own limits. In the overt sense, if we can't help, let's do our best not to hurt.

Well said.

A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words (Iranian Elections Version)

(Courtesy of CBS/Twitpic.com)

Today, the Iranian Soccer team played the South Korean Soccer team in a World Cup Qualifier. As you can see, some of the Iranian players wore green wristbands, in solidarity with the protesters in the streets of Iran.

The Inevitable Charge of "Meddling"

Gee, I wonder if President Obama should have been more forceful in his remarks regarding Iran.

The Iranian Foreign Ministry, meanwhile, summoned the Swiss ambassador, who represents American interests in Tehran, to complain of “interventionist” statements by American officials, state-run media reported. America and Iran broke off diplomatic relations after the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

President Obama said a day earlier that it would be counterproductive for the United States “to be seen as meddling.” But he has also said he was “deeply troubled by the violence” in Iran and that democratic values needed to be observed.

The Iranian Foreign Ministry officials, without being specific about which comments they were reacting to, expressed displeasure, the official IRNA news agency reported. The Canadian chargé d’affaires was also summoned.

This is why I earlier took exception with Abe Greenwald's premise: That President Obama was not forceful enough. The Iranian regime is under immense pressure right now, and anything they can cling to to deflect attention away and/or solidify their hold over the nation, they will use. Even the cautious, measured statements of President Obama.

Obama and the Lesbian and Gay Community

(Image Courtesy of BarackObama.com)

On Election Night, when California was called for Senator/President-Elect Barack Obama, thousands of citizens in my neighborhood (Logan Circle) streamed into the streets to celebrate his victory. Strangers were hugging strangers, citizens where sharing beers with on-duty police officers, and my neighborhood, a very gay-friendly neighborhood, was excited and looking to the future. One of the many strangers I shared a laugh or a hug with that night handed me a sign much like the image to the left, an Obama Pride sign. That sign is still in my home office.

This past Saturday marked the final weekend of "Capital Pride" here in the Nation's Capital, and I wonder if those who were streaming into the streets to mark the new President's election were pleased to read how the Obama Administration defended the Defense of Marriage Act. Last Friday, the Justice Department filed a brief in the case of Smelt and Hammer v. The United States of America, et al., that supported the Defense of Marriage Act. In fact, the brief, as described by John Aravosis, is "despicable" and "homophobic."

Let us revisit Candidate Obama. Taken from his website, Candidate Obama promised to repeal DoMA, to repeal "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," and to oppose a Constitutional Ban on gay marriage.

Now, let us visit President Obama's actions thus far in office. Not only has his Justice Department filed an overly harsh brief in support of DoMA, he has not taken a single step towards repealing DADT. In fact, as Aravosis argues, the brief, and the arguments in the brief defending DoMA, may do more harm that good. Rather than simply stating that the Defense of Marriage Act is settled law and is not ripe to be repealed, the brief goes further, arguing that DoMA is constitutional, reasonable, and equally discriminatory in that it discriminates against straight unmarried couples as well.

Then, adding insult to injury, the brief argues that since States have long been afforded the right to refuse to honor marriages from other states, in such cases as child rape and incest, that DoMA is therefore constituational. States, therefore, are free to invalidate marriages from other states that violate public policy. Be it public policy against child rape, incest, or gay marriage.

Many on the left who supported Obama during the campaign did so because of his promises to the gay community to honor their lifestyles, recognize them as equals and take steps to acknowledge their committed relationships through civil unions and equal rights. Yet all the gay communitity has seen thus far from President Obama is not an outstretched hand, but rather a cold shoulder. This is extremely dissappointing.

Tomorrow, President Obama will sign a Presidential Memo extending Federal benefits to unmarried partners of Federal employees, including gay couples. Many will argue that this is an effort to try and stem the outrage on the President's left flank after last week's brief. Many will argue that this is a nice step but a little late, given the fact that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ordered the State Department to implement this step a month ago. And many more, like myself, will wonder if this is another series of campaign promises this President is now shelving in favor of his bigger goals, be them Health Care or achieving stabilization in Iraq and Afghanistan. Either way, his actions thus far on these issues has been more than dissappointing.

A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words (Iranian Elections Version)

(Image Courtesy of Oliver Laban-Mattei/AFP/Getty Images/Deadspin.com)

Umm....go Buckeyes?

A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words (Iranian Elections Version)

(Image courtesy of the London Times)

Thousands of protesters gather in Tehran to voice their displeasure with the Iranian Election.

Politics Make Strange Bedfellows

(Time Magazine Cover image courtesy of The Imus Times)

Over the course of the Presidential Primary Season, and then the General Election, I found myself often interested in what Pat Buchanan had to say. This is, after all, a man whose views and outlook I rarely, if ever, would agree with. However, I believe that out of all the members of the punditocracy, Buchanan has perhaps the strongest knack for outlining and understanding the real politick of the day.

So I was heartened to read Buchanan's assessment of President Obama's reaction to the events out of Iran, over at Townhall.com.

There are other reasons Obama should not heed the war hawks howling for confrontation now.

When your adversary is making a fool of himself, get out of the way. That is a rule of politics Lyndon Johnson once put into the most pungent of terms. U.S. fulminations will change nothing in Tehran. But they would enable the regime to divert attention to U.S. meddling in Iran's affairs and portray the candidate robbed in this election, Mir-Hossein Mousavi, as a poodle of the Americans.

(Emphasis mine). This is exactly why I disagreed with Abe Greenwald's premise. President Obama is displaying cautious leadership on this issue. The die has been cast in Iran, and it is time to see how the roll plays.

Is President Obama "Accepting the Result in Iran?"

At Commentary Magazine, Abe Greenwald seems to believe so.

I think that is an overly critical reading of both President Obama's statement, as well as the greater role the President should be playing during the course of this situation. As I stated earlier, the situation in Iran right now is reaching critical mass, and any statement from President Obama that would give the mullahs and clerics any "rallying cry" would undermine the "courage of the protesters" Greenwald refers to.

Providing the current Iranian regime with the ability to portray the protesters, or Moussavi, as U.S. stooges would be the absolute worst development in this situation. The next 24 hours in Iran are going to be crucial. The fear is that the regime will resort to even more hard-handed tactics to quell the uproar, but given the energy and passion we have seen over the past few days from those in the streets, it is unclear what it would take to quell this uprising. However, the portrayal of the protesters and Moussavi as U.S. stooges would be a most unfortunate development. It would weaken the movement, peeling off those on the fringes and diminishing the numbers in the streets.

Despite Greenwald's statements to the contrary, the United States is still a "political football" in this scenario. The regime cannot be allowed to point the fingers of blame outside Iran's borders. The United States cannot serve as a distraction at this time, and the Iranian regime cannot be given the opportunity to point their fingers at the U.S. and state with convicton "they are interfering with your country, with your sovereign state."

I wish President Obama were able to state with conviction that which Greenwald argues for in his piece. Sadly, now is not the time nor the moment. Now is the time for restrained anger. A trait this President has displayed time and time again.

"It would be wrong for me to be silent."

(Photo from Jeff Haynes/Getty Images)

Courtesy of The Huffington Post and CNN, Obama remarked on the situation in Iran this evening from the Oval Office. His remarks were restrained and indicated a respect for Iranian sovereignty, but showed, I believe, the right level of support for the protesters in the streets.

A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words (Iranian Elections Edition)

Warning, the image I link to here (available on Sullivan's website, and just displayed on CNN right now, I'm trying to find the original source now) is extremely graphic. It depicts the body of a protester, seemingly shot in the face, and killed. This is a disturbing image, so be warned before you click.

EDIT: According to the Huffington Post, the photo is from the AP.

What Will Obama Say?

(Photo from Jeff Haynes/Getty Images)

Per Time's Michael Scherer, Obama will most likely address the situation in Iran at 5 pm today.

Scherer speculates that Obama will most likely state a restrained, "wait-and-see" position. I agree with this. The situation in Iran right now is extremely volatile. Any signal to Tehran and the clerics in Iran that the West is attempting to tip the scales, or intervene in their electoral process, might be enough for the current Iranian regime to regain control of the situation in Iran.

The message of strength we are seeing is borne out by the images of the protesters in the streets. Protesters who are literally placing their lives on the line to make their voices heard. The cries for democracy out of Iran are louder than ever, and Obama would be wise to let their messages ring loudest right now.

AP: Militia Fire into Iranian Crowd

The AP is reporting that at least one individual is dead after militia members have fired into the crowd at the massive Iranian protest, currently taking place.

There are a lot of reports coming in regarding crowd size, crowd violence, and the like. I'll get them up as soon as I can. I'll also get to Obama's speech to the AMA when I can.

A Picture is Worth a Thousand Words (Iranian Elections Version)

Image taken from CNN, courtesy of AFP/Getty Images.

Today, Presidential Candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi appeared at a rally in support of his campaign, and against the election results in Iran.

A Stunning Reversal

I do apologize for the lack of updates over the weekend.

Lots of news out of Iran. Hundreds of protests in Tehran over the weekend over the election "results." Andrew Sullivan has done a fantastic job of tracking both the protests and the harsh and brutal tactics imposed by the Iranian police force in response. News today that Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, has ordered a clerical review of the election results. This is a stunning change, as earlier Khamenei twice certified the election results as valid, on one occasion referring to them as a "divine assessment."

We've also seen an explosion in individual coverage of these events via social networking sites, specifically Twitter. Sullivan has many updates from Twitter feeds in Iran.

My assessment of all of this? There was a level of election fraud here, but those committing the fraud overreached. A tightly contested election with a close result, perhaps just above the threshold for a runoff election, would be believable. A blowout like the one claimed is not. Khamenei is now trying to put the genie back in the bottle with this clerical review. I am almost positive the results will stand, perhaps with a downward adjustment to Ahmadinejad's vote totals.

And still, the chants will rain down from the rooftops.

Voting Hours Extended in Iran

Courtesy of the Guardian's coverage, polling hours have been extended in Iran to deal with the high level of voter turnout in today's elections.

From the same article, the Ahmadinejad campaign has boasted of winning a clear majority of today's vote. I would not put too much stock in such statements right now. His rival's campaign made the same exact statement less than a few hours ago.

Reports Indicate High Iranian Turnout

Good news for Mousavi...report from Reuters via TPM.

8-0

Sox improve to 8 and 0 on the season against the Yankees.

(Image from the Boston Globe)

Wait, look over here! Pay attention to us!

Not to be outdone, word out this evening that North Korea may be preparing for yet another nuclear test.

The continued escalation out of Pyongyang provides an interesting backdrop to the elections today in Iran. As confirmed by CIA director Leon Panetta, the Obama Administration's approach to North Korea's nuclear ambitions will be an "important signal" for how the Administration will deal with Iranian nuclear ambitions. Re-election for Ahmadinejad will not only be a blow to the pro-Western movement in Iran, but would also just keep another big ticket item on Obama's "to-do" list.

4 Hours...

...until the polls open in Iran.

Here's to a safe and fair democratic process.

(Image from the Associated Press)

Iran, Continued

Courtesy of the political forum over at Sons of Sam Horn (a fantastic forum dedicated to all things Red Sox) comes this link to a news website run by Iranian natives now currently living in the United States. In the coming hours, this website will be a great resource for following the developments in Iran.

Is Something Happening in Iran?

Andrew Sullivan, a writer and thinker I have a great deal of respect for, seems to think there is. Over at The Atlantic, Sullivan is chronicling the upcoming elections, and some posts of his discuss the potential movement against Ahmadinejad, such as those here, here and here.

I will admit I was much more optimistic over the recent elections in Lebanon than I am regarding tomorrow's Iranian elections. Middle East expert Djavad Salehi-Isfahani, writing for the Brookings Institute, outlines the terms in Iran:

The goal of the reformists for Friday is to take the election to the second round, where they think they have a good chance of defeating Mr. Ahmadinejad. Odds are good that this will happen, but by no means will it be easy. First, Mr. Ahmadinejad is a formidable campaigner and enjoys the implicit support of the Supreme Leader as well as large sections of the lower classes. Second, in the last two years he has been busy redistributing income to the lower strata and evidence shows that this may have succeeded in creating greater support. Finally, no president of the Islamic Republic has served just one term throughout Iran’s history.

As Sullivan states, this is not a completely fair election, and the scales will be tipped towards Ahmadinejad. However, if the reformers can push this into the second round, that will be a victory in itself. Coupled with the pro-Western victory in Lebanon earlier in the week, it will be a second straight signal to the rest of the Middle East that perhaps, just perhaps, things are changing. And that perhaps, something is happening.

Grand Opening!

Well, I've toyed around with starting a blog for a very long time now, and I've finally given in. Or surrendered. Fine line between the two, I believe.

In the weeks, months, and hopefully years ahead, this will be a spot to follow a variety of topics, from sports to politics, entertainment to food. But for now, I'll just kick things off with this thought: If you had told me back in February that the Red Sox would start the season 7-0 against the Yankees, and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would be in danger of losing re-election in Iran, I would not have believed you. But here we are, on June 11th, and both statements are true. Amazing.