World News Insights
1-3 Minute Gist

Browse Articles or use Lyrarc's US patented "Groups" and "Links" for new insights. A Lyrarc Group of Articles on a topic gives insights into particular angles shown in the Group Title. A Lyrarc Link shows more specific insights for 2 articles.

All Topics Articles

LyrArc brings in selected articles from many of the world's top publications.

Articles are selected by experts and you can see the gist of the important articles.


Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Chevron CEO John Watson says the U.S. needs more affordable energy, and this means it needs to find more fossil fuels. It needs more oil gas and coal. He says the U.S. should take advantage of its own fossil fuel resources. People want strong environmental standards, but as Watson puts it, their top most priority is affordable energy which creates economic growth and jobs. He criticizes the Obama administration for not pushing ahead with developing of U.S. offshore oil, because BP's problems were not systemic and industry wide. He calls for dramatically increasing U.S. oil production, and doing this immediately. Worldwide Chevron plans to invest $26 billion for its exploration budget, and plans to drill in Australia, Western Africa, Gulf of Thailand and other locations. Watson points out that the dynamics of oil production are affected by two factors, price and technology. With current prices at over $100 a barrel more oil is accessible. At these prices new technologies can make it possible to use existing older wells to increase production. He cites the example of Bakersfield, where steam flooding is helping get 70 to 80 barrels out of every 100 barrels in the ground, when in the past Chevron could only get 10-20 barrels of oil. Another technology he mentions is hydrofracking for producing large and cheap supplies of natural gas. Chevron acquired Atlas Energy for $3.2 billion in 2010 to enter this market. Watson's overall emphasis is on the U.S. going for affordable energy and affordable conservation that will create economic growth and a better future....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Steve Lohr of the NYT talks of industrial policy by the Obama administration that is behind the new mileage standards of 31.5 by 2016. But when one looks at the huge gap opening up between compettitors in Europe and Japan and the Detroit carmakers in technologies for fuel efficiency, and the fact that foreign car makers now control more than 50% of the car market in the USA, it may just be that the Detroit carmakers will now be doing what it takes to compete with the Japanese and the Europeans. And one looks at it carefully one sees a compromise here by the Obama administration, the Euopeans and the Japanese have standards that require closer to 50mpg in 2016, leaving Detroit carmakers behind even with the new standards.
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This report by Nate Cohn of the NYT shows how the U.S. election map is changing in 2016 with Hillary Clinton strong among college educated voters and weaker with working class voters than president Obama in 2008. She more than makes up for this loss of working class voters in many red Republican states in the southern U.S.- as Cohn shows there are about 1.5-2.5 college educated voters in the southern and mountain states compared to working class voters. The pattern is reversed in midwestern states where there are only about 0.5 college educated voters for every working class voters. This is why Trump is doing better in Ohio, Iowa and Clinton doing better in Georgia, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Utah, Colorado, traditionally Republican states. Overall there is less focus on cultural wars and abortion issues in this election, with focus shifting to beneficiaries of globalization, and people hurt by trade and globalization in older factory towns. Even in the suburbs of Philadelphia, Cloumbus, Milwaukee, and in western Michigan Clinton does very well because of college educated voters, including white college educated voters. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Gordon Crovitz points out in this op-ed that an issue of this importance of preserving an open and independent internet free of influence of governments and politicians, should not be left to the Assistant Secretary of the Commerce Department and administration officials. He points out the need for Congress to play a role in determining the future openness and independent nature of the internet free of politics and governments. He says the Obama administration's move to use the Dotcom Act to transfer the role now played by ICANN to a new body in which other governments say they want to play a major role, is a mistake as it risks the very openness of the internet that has been its core quality and mission till now. Doing this by July 2016, in 30 days following its submission to Congress by the Obama administration, is prevented by Senator Ted Cruz's effort in Congress requiring clear approval by Congress. The U.S. has a unique role in this respect because of its role in defending freedom of speech since its founding, a role found nowhere else in the world. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This editorial in the NYT on May 23, 2015, says the country has lost something in the process unfolding at the Justice Department of large settlements during the second term of the Obama administration, a continuation of a singular feature since the first term- a noticeable and serious lack of individual accountability for serious wrongdoing. This lets bank officers move on calling the situation of pleading guilty to criminal charges for currency manipulation nothing more than "an embarrassment," says this NYT editorial.
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Daniel Yergin of consultancy firm IHS describes the geopolitical disputes in the Middle East between Russia, Saudi Arabia, and Iran that are leading to likely continued oversupply of oil in 2016, keeping prices in the $30-$40 range. Saudi Arabia is not likely to change its policy of going after market share, Venezuela is affected but lacks a voice in OPEC decisions, Russia continues its policies in Syria and Iraq under the Putin government affecting other Sunni states, and Iran following the lifting of sanctions is likely to ramp up supply to make up for its lost market share- all leading to an extended period of low prices. This situation benefits China, the European Union countries, India, Turkey and the U.S. in a period of slow economic growth in 2015-2016. Russia looks to use this period of low oil prices to shift to domestic industry after a period of rising imports when oil prices were high. The Saudis seeing their interests in the region threatened by Iran and Russia, and dissatisfied with the foreign policy of president Obama, see a policy of pushing for market share as appropriate in the current geopolitics of the region....
NYTimes.com Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The comparison by Goldsmith and Moyn has picked the wrong Roosevelt. Only Washington in the war of independence, Lincoln in the Civil War over slavery, and FDR Franklin Delano Roosevelt in the Great Depression and economic collapse, fall in that category and there is no one and nothing to compare with both the struggles they fought and the challenge to the survival of the US. On the next scale comes TR Teddy Roosevelt, and this is the Roosevelt to compare DJT with. TR was unconventional, TR spoke a different language and could be frank and outspoken. TR actions matched his words, as his days on the Indian frontier and with the Rough Riders. TR also had one term plus completing McKinley's term after his assasination. And TR like DJT did not like his successor and did everything to make the comeback denouncing the policies of his successor William Howard Taft in the 1912 election, which TR lost to Democrat Woodrow Wilson. All this is true for DJT in 2026. TR denounced the shift away from his "progressive policies" and the shift to corporate interests of Republican Taft. In this sense also DJT is similar as he denounced the shift to corporate interests of the Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama years. TR was no country club Republican and was willing to confront opponents in the politics to fight for the benefit of the working man, splitting the Republican party in the process. This is true of DJT. TR launched the rebuilding of the Navy, and announced he would reassert the Monroe Doctrine. DJT is doing the same and is reasserting the Monroe Doctrine. One could say that DJT feels the hidden TR in him and like Teddy Roosevelt is putting America in the place it once was. For TR the industrial revolution had distorted a country founded on the backs of settlers owning the land independent and rugged, as industry turned the country into corporate interests and workers in factories with few rights, and poor working conditions and wages. This TR even as a Republican fought to reverse. In DJT there is the Republican also of a different mould who fights to reverse the situation created by Bush/Clinton/Bush/ Obama over three decades since the 1990's when America has fallen to new lows when drug trafficking gangs in Mexico and Venezuela are able to run rampant over the western hemisphere, when elites in Canada and the US act impotent in the face of this, or living in their own world away from the streets and neighborhoods of America devastated by drug trafficking, towns and neighborhoods from Janesville to Flint economically deprived as elites shifted manufacturing overseas to China in complete indifference to the American worker and his family, and carried out wars in remote parts of the world such as hills of Afghanistan and deserts of Iraq no worker or farmer in America had even heard of or cared about since the American continent was settled in 1600. If there is a Woodrow Wilson around the corner who won in 1912, for the 2028 election, then it is someone who like Wilson will take policies to benefit the American worker and farmer and his family, and America as a Nation to a better place over the next decade. A passage from Teddy Roosevelt from his Autobiography about who TR was struggling against illustrates this point- "They favored Civil Service Reform; they favored copyright laws, and the removal of tariffs on works of art; they favored all the proper (and even more strongly the improper ) movements for international peace and arbitration; in short, they favored all good and many goody-goody, measures so long as they did not cut deep into social wrong or make demands on National and individual virility. They opposed, or were lukewarm, about efforts to build up the army and the navy, for they were not sensitive regarding National honor, and above all they opposed every non-milk-and-water effort, however sane to change our social and economic system in such a fashion as to substitute the ideal of justice towards all for the ideal of kindly charity from the favored few to the possibly grateful many." (Theodore Roosevelt, Autobiography, Chapter 5 title: Applied Idealism, 1913) ...
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Did a major U.S. chip maker Advance Micro Devices give away advanced computer chip technology in deals that saved the company as it faced a downturn in business. In Jun 2019 the U.S. Commerce Department issued an order that bars several Chinese companies from getting American technology. In the meantime Chinese versions of AMD chips are rolling off production lines in China, according to this report in the WSJ. It shows that AMD's partner in China, a military contractor, already used those chips to build what could be the world's fastest supercomputer. The AMD deals gave China access to state  of the art x86 chips made only by AMD and Intel Corp. Here the WSJ says AMD's CEO in October 2014 Lis Su, faced AMD's financial difficulties when she joined, with lack of cash, large debt, and declining revenues. Some analysts predicting bankruptcy protection. The deal for China's company Sugon to manufacture the x86 chips included $293 million in licensing fees, and $371 million for selling an 85% stake in its two factories in China and Malaysia to China Integrated Circuit Industry Investment Fund Co, a state backed financier. The U.S defense Department tried but failed to get AMD to submit the deals to Cfius, the committee on foreign investment in the U.S. that has people from Treasury, Defense, Commerce, Justice and Energy. The Treasury Department ruled in AMD's favor in the closing months of the Obama administration. Defense Department officials say the deals were structured to sidestep U.S. regulations through two interlinked joint ventures. The first venture focusses on R&D and production controlled by AMD, the second on design and sale controlled by AMD's Chinese partner. The second company venture enables China to show that the resulting product was developed locally in China. In another development Sugon publicly announced that it was using the AMD x86 chip to advance China's chip technology advancement just as it had done for high speed trains. Making indigenous an imported technology, designing it at home, absorbing it, and then innovating to make China a leader. By mid 2017 this information reached General Spalding at the Trump White House. Lawmakers wanted to give Cfius committee new powers. By August 2018 Defense department submitted the Sugon deal for review a second time. After the Defense Department's deputy undersecretary for Research and Engineering criticized the whole deal publicly in front of industry executives, Commerce Department stepped in and on June 21 it asked for the unwinding of the deal with Sugon,  imposing new export restrictions to limit access to U.S. technologies. For AMD the cash infusion from China enabled it to get back from near bankruptcy. China gained x86 technology in its bid to make the fastest supercomputer, the U.S. faced with another loss in technological edge, and AMD shares jumped 80% to $30 per share recently. Brian Spegele, Kate O'Keefe, and Yang Jie in Beijing, covered this story for the Wall Street Journal. ...
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Did U.S. Treaury Secretary, Timothy Geithner, ignore a key request by President Obama to present plans for the restructuring of Citigroup after the government bailout of Citigroup? Ron Suskind says this is what happened in his book on the Obama administration and how the White House operated to make key decisions. Ron Suskind, intervewed key members of the Obama White House economic policy team, Lawrence Summers, Christina Romer, Peter Orszag. In all Suskind conducted 700 hours of interviews for his new book in Sept 2011: "Confidence Men: Wall Street, Washington and the Education of a President." According to the book, in early 2009 after Obama authorized a series of stress tests for banks he told Geithner to develop a plan for restructuring Citigroup. A month later at a meeting not attended by Geithner Obama raised a question about the status of the plan. He was told by Romer that no restructuring plan had been developed for Citi. Suskind says Geithner disagreed about a plan to restructure Citi and decided to ignore the request. Geithner and the Treasury Department say Obama asked Geithner to develop a backup plan to overhaul banks if the government was forced to keep a big ownership stake in the companies, and "there was fortunately never a need to put them in place." Geithner told Suskind that he doesn't slow-walk the President on any matter. Other aspects of the operation of the economic policy team that Suskind covers are a series of memos from top aide Pete Rouse raising questions that ongoing communication between some members of the economic team and Summers was giving Summers power to shape policy. Summers, Director of the National Economic Council, is shown as trying to keep out the views of Romer and budget director Orszag from reaching the President without going through him. When Orszag gives a private report to the president on the deficit, Summers objects saying that this was immoral. Obama lacked the fresh ideas needed to tackle the problems created by the mortgage and banking crisis of 2008, when he used the Clinton administration economic policy team of the 1990's- Rubin, Bernanke, Summers and Geithner. Fresh approaches were needed two decades after Clinton's election in 1992, and the Bush administration that followed, as many of the problems developed during this period. The similiar embedded thinking was shared during the Clinton and Bush administrations and the economic advisors about dealings with the banking sector, but the situation for deficits, unemployment, housing, and the economy had completely changed requiring fresh approaches. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Obama administration denied approval for the TransCanada Keystone pipeline. President Obama made it clear that the decision was made because of the "arbitrary" February approval deadline imposed by Republicans in Congress, and said this "is not a judgement on the merits of the pipeline." The administration suggested that TransCanada reapply. TransCanada CEO Russ Girling says the company is "fully committed to the construction of Keystone XL, and that it "will reapply for a presidential permit and expect a new application would be processed in an expedited manner to allow for an in-service date of late 2014." Experts say the U.S. could reuse some of the studies and analyses and that the process would take 18-24 months. Alberta's premier, Alison Redford, says she believes the project will get approved.
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Democratic Party U.S. presidential candidate Bernie Sanders tells a Georgetown University audience that Muslim nations should bear the biggest share of the burden of fighting Islamic State. He cites reports Qatar was spending $200 billion to host the Soccer World Cup in 2022 but providing little to bear the cost of fighting extremism in the Muslim world. Sanders says his focus in running is not on pursuing "reckless adventures abroad, but to rebuild America's strength at home." This contrasted with remarks by Hillary Clinton in New York the same day calling for the U.S. to lead the fight to defeat the the Islamic State terror network after Paris attacks in Nov. 2015, and putting forward a position that contrasts with that of the Obama administration.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
US president Biden makes three nominations to the US central bank, the Federal Reserve. Lisa Cook's nomination to the central bank is confirmed in the Senate 51-50. Following the appointment of Lael Brainard to the central bank as vice chairwoman, president Biden has nominated Cook, the first Black woman on the Federal Reserve board from Michigan State University. He has also nominated Mr. Jefferson of Davidson College to the Federal Reserve board. A fourth nomination is of Michael Barr, a law professor, as the Federal Reserve's vice chair of supervision. Lael Brainard served under president Clinton and is on the board of the Fed since 2014. She was Treasury Under Secretary for International Affairs from 2010 to 2013, coordinating economic policy at G-7 meetings during that time. Jerome Powell, the current chairman of the US central bank is being renominated as chairman by president Biden after Powell's term expired in February. Lisa Cook's research focus was on policies that promote broad economic opportunities for women and racial minorities. She served on the Council of Economic Advisors under the Obama administration, and has worked at the Treasury Department. With Janet Yellen at Treasury and Jerome Powell and Brainard at the US central bank there is a shift to policies that will promote president Biden's agenda for his first term to invest in infrastructure, supply chain renewal and working class families in America. ...
The Guardian Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Obama ACA subsidies to go directly to the people through Health Savings Accounts proposed by Republican Senators Graham, Scott and Cassidy in 2017, and again in 2025, and not to Insurance companies. In a post on his social media site DJT tells Congress that the ACA subsidies given directly to people rather than money sucking insurance companies would lead to a better result of people getting their own and better coverage for less money than under Obama type subsidies sent to insurance companies.  Much of Obamacare was done under a campaign from insurance companies and other health vested interests that undermined the original objectives so that however good the original objectives the watered down, disincentivising of reducing unproductive costs, led to a hotch potch band aid result. A common sense approach with the courage to get the right result that works for the people of the Nation to get good health care similar to Japan and other nations in Europe at reasonable cost is not a goal that an advanced nation like the US should see as unreachable or beyond our efforts, skills and wisdom. Obama and Bush failed, Bush in a major error to remove the negotiating power of government Medicare agency with pharmaceutical companies that Democrats failed to push back. ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Deficit Commission setup by US President Obama recommended changes in the tax codes including elimination of the deduction for mortgage interest. It calls for limiting spending on health care, gradually raising the retirement age, and lowering the tax rate. The commission identified $200 billion in discretionary spending cuts, with half coming from defense spending. The federal gasoline tax rate would increase from 2013, increasing by 15 cents a gallon at that point. It would gradually increase the retirement age to 68 by 2050. And combine a reduction in benefits with an increase in taxes on wealthier senior's benefits. It seeks to slow Medicare growth to control health care spending. Other proposals. A freeze on salaries and bonuses of federal employees for three years, to save $15 billion by 2015. And proposes cutting the federal work force by 10% to save additional $13 billion by 2015.
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This Washington Post editorial says vice president Biden's comments that "I guarantee you, flat guarantee you, there will be no changes to Social Security. I flat guarantee you," made to a voter in Southern Virginia, is downright disheartening. It points out that this is not the conclusion of the trustees of the Social Security Fund, which includes the secretaries of Treasury, labor and health and human services of the Obama administration. The April annual report of the trustees says that the disability portion of the trust fund "becomes exhausted in 2016," and the overall fund "becomes exhausted and unable to pay scheduled benefits in full on a timely basis in 2033." Actions suggested by the trustees include: raising the payroll tax, tweaking the inflation calculator, reducing benefits, or some combination of this. It is clear from polls that the U.S. voter does not want either party to touch Social Security, but the reality is something different. The idea of a flat guarantee in the light of facts that all can see is seen by the Post as going too far, trying to win votes at the cost of postponing necessary decisions which will become harder and costlier if not addressed early....
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Bill Keller on the virtues of U.S. President Obama picking Hillary Clinton as his vicepresidential running mate in 2012.
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Tankersley points to the broken links between economic growth and growth in jobs and incomes since 1989, which have created a shrinking U.S. middle class. In the postwar period before 1989, a one percent increase in economic growth generated a six tenths of one percent increase in jobs growth during economic recoveries. During the 1992 recovery under George Bush this was down to 0.4%. In the 2001 recovery under George W. Bush this dropped to 0.2%, during the current recovery under Obama this is at 0.3%. Income growth also showed a similiar pattern. Median household incomes declined from 1990-1992 and from 2002-2004, after adjusting for inflation, even with economic growth of 6% during this period. For the 2009-2011 recovery period the economic growth was about 4% yet real median incomes increased barely at 0.5%. By contrast from 1982 to 1984 with economic growth of 11%, real median incomes went up by 5%. The result workers median wages are lower now in the beginning of 2013, after inflation adjustment, than at the end of 2003, and real household income lower in 2011 than in 1989, says Tankersley. Why were the recoveries of 1990 and 2001 for the most part jobless? U.S. Federal Reserve studies show employers mindset had changed, instead of hiring back laid off workers during recoveries, employers did not add many jobs. Automation in factories requiring fewer workers, global outsourcing and supply chains, manufacturing overseas, lack of union-management cooperation on wages and jobs in industries such as the auto industry, increase in temp workers, all played a part in creating fewer and fewer good paying jobs. Some of this is playing out worldwide. In Japan the economic recovery has also come with similiar costs- moving jobs overseas for the auto and electronics industries, increase in temporary worker jobs with lower pay and benefits to about one third of all jobs, and depressed consumer spending as a result lowering the economic growth potential. Even the recent German economic recovery has come with an increase in lower paying temporary jobs and driven by exports to Asia. For the U.S. the situation was worsened by three additional factors- housing foreclosures and the hit to savings from the 2008 financial crisis, high cost of college tution and resulting debt, and the high cost of medical care. The Obama administration's effort to increase the minimum wage would help the poor, but do little to address the broken links between economic growth and jobs growth/income growth. The push for college education does not address affordability and neglects jobs training. Most of the questions raised by the changing patterns remain unanswered, which may be why Obama calls this a generation's task, not that of one administration....
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
A proposal for deficit reduction from the "Gang of Six" in the U.S. Senate gains support from Obama, Boehner and Cantor, as other proposals languish for lack of support in both Houses of Congress. The efforts to pass a balanced budget amendment and deficit reduction in the House is now seen as a concession to newly elected conservatives in the House by Boehner even as other options are being pursued to meet an August 2, 2011 deadline. The efforts of credit rating agencies to reconsider the credit ratings of certain states and the U.S. is also putting new pressure on getting some sort of serious deficit reduction now as opposed to putting it off for discussion between now and the end of the year, as proposed by the McConnell plan.
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Mark Landler on the Obama administration's view of the nuclear deal wih Iran at the Geneva talks in November 2013.
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This Washington Post analysis of the Republican tax bill gives an exceptional view of the bill's impact and provisions. This is the first major change to the tax laws since 1986. The size of the bill is $1.5 trillion, with the Joint Committe on Taxation projection that the bill will increase tax revenues over a decade by $500 billion, meaning that it will cost $1 trillion being added to the deficit. What the bill does: 1. It offers a permanent tax cut to corporations by reducing the corporate tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent. Industries benefiting the most are mining, real estate, technology, manufacturing. 2. The individual tax cuts expire in 2025. They are skewed to disproportionately help highest income Americans, much less lower income Americans and much more highest income Americans compared to high income Americans. In this sense it is skewed in a an unusual way to the highest earning Americans- a sort of Trump effect in place. The top 1% get a tax break of $51,140 in 2019, middle income people earning about $100,000 get about $1000 a year in 2019, tax payers earning around $50,000 about $380, and those earning less than $25,000 about $60 a year in 2019. Taxpayers earning about 150,000 get about $2000 a year tax cut. (Tax Policy Center) 3. The basic assumption is that tax cuts are revenue neutral if there is economic growth and most of that growth comes from corporations investing in growth. The problem as Greg Ip points out in the Wall Street Journal is that countries trying thsi approach in the past such as Britain have not seen such growth materialize. Corporate profits are the highest in 15 years as percentage of GDP, according to Vanguard founder Bogle, and are now 20% of GDP compared 11% in 1980. If corporations did not invest with this level of profits how much additional investment is going to happen, ask critics, especially as demand drives growth and wages are not boosted under this plan.  4.  Because the bill's changes to current law makes it likely that 13 million less Americans will be insured over a decade- from fewer people signing up for Medicaid and on exchanges for Affordable Care Act- it will hurt lower income Americans. Skewing at both ends of the income spectrum of this type is rare in American history particularly in the twentieth century after the Depression of the 1930's, and poses risks for social cohesion, making it unpopular with most Americans. A CBS News poll taken Dec 3-5 shows 53% of all Americans opposed, only 35% support the tax bill just passed in Congress.  5. Then why did Republicans do this? Republicans needed a legislative success after failure to repeal the Obama Affordable Care law. This pressure led to passage with Republicans probably aware that this is temporary tax reform requiring a real effort by both parties working together after the midterm elections in 2018 and as the presidential election approaches in 2019.    ...
Wall Street Journal Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
The Obama administration's Small Business Jobs Act of Sept 2010 set aside $30 billion to stimulate lending to small business. Only 7% of 7700 U.S. lenders have signed up for the program so far. The deadline to sign up to participate has been extended from March 31 to May 16, 2011, by the Treasury Department. Banks have been hesitant to sign up for various reasons: banks say they see a stigma to taking these loans, and need additional staff to handle the extra paperwork. Banks say there isn't enough demand for loans from small business, or that there is enough capital already to handle larger better collateralized borrowers with the others considered too risky anyway.
The New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
This exceptional report on Hillary Clinton shows how difficult it has become to know Hillary Clinton through media accounts because it has been so distorted. Part of the distortion is from bits and pieces of her life being known, not the complete person. This comes from election campaigns dating back to Bill Clinton's second campaign for governor against Gay White, in which the fact that she had not changed her name and did not mix well with Arkansas's conservative society and manners, made this aspiring Northerner not looked at positively. Bill Clinton lost that election and came back to win in the next election for Governor. For that to happen Hillary had to change her name and the way she dressed to fit into Arkansas culture. Continually throughout Bill's career including the presidential campaigns Hillary Clinton had to change or adapt her persona as "Hillary" the person in politics as a candidate's wife, to fit in with what the public wanted to see.  Another facet of Hillary is her strong sense of privacy, not to reveal too much of herself, partly from her mother's ordeal as a child, partly from her Methodist upbringing not to speak too much about oneself. Her bookish nature as a person who studied policy, made this more evident. Political campaigns use some details about how a candidate or his wife is perceived, and Hillary herself said in 1995, telling the Washington Post that "I don't think you can know anybody else," because of what she called the crude mechanisms that only take bits and pieces of a person's life, not the whole person. Her own campaign for president suffered from this distortion as Mark Penn, her campaign strategist, pushed for her experience and hard work to be the basis of her campaign against Obama. Obama had his own focus groups in New Hampshire and Iowa show him that he could could do well as a story teller for change and a movement. It was not till the second presidential run in 2016 that the idea of a woman's movement was what Hillary was clearly put forward as. Throughout all this and all the years the woman Hillary Clinton has been essentially the same, adaption does not mean that you are less of what you are, however great the belittling in the media's version of life and events. And this is the Hillary Clinton, not the "Hillary," America is facing in October 2016, as the country ponders its on future, following some of the most denigration of women in any presidential campaign of the last two hundred years. ...
New York Times Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
Republican leaders and President Obama reached a deal after intense budget negotiations that would cut $38 billion in spending for 2011.
Washington Post Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Obama visits Germany in April 2016 just as Chancellor Merkel is under pressure in Germany for her stand supporting refugees right to stay in Germany. Merkel has modified her position to accomodate public opinion by controlling the flow of refugees through a treaty with Turkey that returns refugees back to Turkey.
WSJ Original article ›
LyrArc Article Gist
It is hard to imagine that one is even writing about this, as shocking as it is- the 4 or 5 minutes between a decision to launch nuclear weapons and the end of life on this planet earth as we know it. Here Sam Nunn, a U.S. senator who was part of the negotiations for arms control and who is the leading American in this field talks about the unimaginable danger. He says the strategy from the Cold War where Russia and the U.S. put their nuclear forces in a position to be launched within minutes, 4 to 5 minutes, is outdated and needs to be changed. Hillary Clinton described the issue in the television debate. Yet this was not discussed because of the nature of the 2016 presidential election with lack of serious discussion.  And both Nunn and Clinton emphasize that once the missiles are in the air they cannot be ordered to go back. Accidental error, judgemental error, informational error in which one side thinks the other has launched a missile, a firing by mistake, are possible. In this situation Nunn says Trump is temperamentally unfit, and Clinton is fit to take on the responsibility. Yet the question this raises is as Nunn signals- is anyone but God fit to make this decision to launch nuclear weapons. Nunn says it is outdated and wrong to have only a few minutes, as such a decision cannot be made in a few hours or days, much less in 5 minutes. Nunn brings up a discussion he had in Moscow when he brought this up with Russians and president Putin. Russian president Putin told Nunn that he was fully aware of this. Putin's response was- "Senator Nunn, at some point it becomes automatic."  Nunn does not clarify what this means, or what Putin means to say. For people on the planet it is not enough to have Reagan, Gorbachev, Clinton, as Nunn mentions being responsible people for a nuclear decision. The current state of affairs is simply shocking and the lack of attention to this is also shocking. Equally dangerous is that 20 countries have weapons usable nuclear material, and sophisticated hacking of command and control processes is another danger.       ...

Support LyrArc

We took a different way to help millions around the world build educated informed mindsets that affects and shapes their lives. For a future that is open, global and digital, with everyone having access to high quality information. We believe in the renewal of America, renewal of Europe, the renewal of India, the rest of Asia, Latin America and Africa. The renewal of our supply chains, health, education, infrastructure, as we rebuild our countries after the pandemic. Literacy and knowledge we believe cannot thrive and grow in a world of web bots, web crawlers, or AI. This requires human curiosity, human learning, and human imagination. We take as inspiration the saying- “One has to be free, and as broad as sky. One has to have a mind that is crystal clear, only then can truth shine in it.” Every contribution whether big or small is precious- in this crisis and ahead.

Support Lyrarc from as small as $1


Copyright © 2006 - 2026 Intelilinks LLC
Terms and Conditions | Copyright Policy | Privacy Policy | Contact Us