One Hispanic News Anchor Challenges ‘Blowjob Journalism’

Picture: "Newspaper Line" by Genista / Kai Schreiber, flickr, (CC BY-SA 2.0) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/, text edit
Picture: “Newspaper Line” by Genista / Kai Schreiber, flickr, (CC BY-SA 2.0) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/, text edit

Jorge Ramos, a popular news anchor for the Hispanic-oriented Fusion network, reminds us that the role of journalists in a democracy is not to write blowjob pieces, but to hold power accountable:

“The Italian journalist Oriana Fallaci used to say that for her, an interview was like a war [. . .] I get the sense that we’ve forgotten that here in the United States. You turn on the TV, and you see very bland interviews. Journalists in the United States are very cozy with power, very close to those in power. They laugh with them. They go to the [White House] correspondents’ dinner with them. They have lunch together. They marry each other. They’re way too close to each other. I think as journalists we have to keep our distance from power. [emphasis mine]” – Jorge Ramos, Fusion anchor

Recently, in a way validating his point, Ramos received criticism from exactly the kind of establishment journalist he was talking about after hammering Speaker of the House John Boehner for blocking a vote on immigration reform and not letting him divert from the issue.

The unspoken rule of providing groveling, uncritical reporting in exchange for access to politicians—i.e. ‘blowjob journalism’—is exactly what is wrong with contemporary corporate-controlled mainstream media.

Those so-called journalists enganged in this travesty are indeed a disgrace for the profession and corrosive to democracy as a whole.

Thank goodness there are still some brave individuals willing to go against the grain and ruffle some feathers.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/05/jorge-ramos-fusion-politics-immigration-107124.html

Sex Education In The US Versus In Germany

Sex Education In The US Versus In Germany

According to the common stereotype, sexual morality in the US is still influenced by Puritan prudishness, while Europe prides itself on a more open attitude. One indicator of this seems to be the spread of abstinence-only sex education in the US.

But now a new sex education textbook aimed at five-year-olds has been published in Germany. Is this too young an age to educate children about how they came about?

TheLip.tv asked Americans on the street about their views:

Odd Political Moves: John McCain’s Benghazi Press Conference Edition

I also demand a hearing into which hearings
I should have attended while demanding more hearings.
– Liberal blog Daily Kos summing up John McCain’s press conference on Benghazi1

Former GOP presidential candidate Senator John McCain recently gave a press conference on the Benghazi terrorist attack, demanding more investigation of the incident. When a CNN reporter pointed out to McCain that, instead of giving a press conference, he might be attending a confidential briefing at the Senate Homeland Security Committee, of which he is a member, McCain lost it. Oh my…

[Update]: “McCain Backs Away From Benghazi Conspiracies.” (Think Progress, 11/20/2012)

Round 4: Romney and Obama’s Third and Last Debate Covers Foreign Policy

Tonight (October 22, 2012), President Barack Obama and challenger Mitt Romney hold their third and final debate, this time at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Florida, and with a focus on foreign policy. During the last debate, Romney already attacked Obama’s foreign policy to some extent, for instance by (falsely) claiming that the president had not called the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 an act of terrorism—the respective transcript produced by the debate moderator proved Romney wrong on this allegation.

Topics that will certainly be on the agenda tonight: Iran’s nuclear program and relations with China. Other issues which I assume will not be discussed, even though they merit serious debate: the expanding drone wars under the current administration in the ‘war on terror,’ in particular so-called signature strikes, and the conscious decision of the justice department not to hold accountable the architects and enforcers of the torture regime in said ‘war on terror,’ which sets a precedent for future administrations. So let us see what the two candidates have to say.

[Update: They did talk about drones and Romney agreed with President Obama’s current policy.]

You can watch the debate here:

The complete final debate on YouTube:

The YouTube election hub also has a plethora of political videos here.

You can also watch the complete third Obama-Romney debate at the New York Times, which has a handy running transcript next to the video.

You can also watch the complete third Obama-Romney debate at the Washington Post, which has a handy running transcript next to the video.

2012 Election Central has a schedule of all 2012 debates here.

Fact-checking:

Fact check: Claims about Syria, Libya, Iraq scrutinized.” (USA Today, 10/23/2012)

Fact checking the third presidential debate.” (Washington Post, 10/23/2012)

Fact-checking Websites:

factcheck.org

politifact.com

Romney All Wet on Ships.” (FactCheck, 10/26/2012)

False Claims in Final Debate.” (FactCheck, 10/23/2012)

Fact-checking the third presidential debate.” (PolitiFact, 10/22/2012)

Fact-checking foreign policy.” (PolitiFact, 10/21/2012)

Fact-checking taxes in the presidential race.” (PolitiFact, 10/15/2012)

Presidential Debate Fact-Check and Updates.” (New York Times, 10/16/2012)

[Infographic and analysis] “Obama’s Numbers: Statistical measures of the president’s term to date.” (FactCheck, 10/08/2012)

How to Prime Your BS Detection Skills Before the Presidential Debates.” (Lifehacker, 10/03/2012)

Debate Coverage:

Post-Debate:

[Memes] “About Those Horses and Bayonets ….” (New York Times, 10/23/2012)

A Good Debate for Obama, But Can He Stop Romney?” (Atlantic, 10/23/2012)

Obama’s Two Most Revealing Moments In Last Night’s Debate.” (The New Republic, 10/23/2012)

Romney’s Big Navy Guru Made Millions From Building Ships.” (Wired, 10/23/2012)

Romney’s Final Debate Message: I’ll Be A Better Obama.” (Talking Points Memo, 10/23/2012)

The foreign-policy debate: A win for Obama.” (Economist, 10/23/2012)

[Memes] “Top 5 final-debate memes: ‘Horses and Bayonets,’ and more.” (The Week, 10/23/2012)  via @TheWeek

Obama Unlikely to Get Big Debate Bounce, but a Small One Could Matter.” (New York Times, 10/23/2012)

Obama wins final debate, but does it matter?” ( CNN, 10/23/2012)

Obama, Romney go on attack in final debate.” (USA Today, 10/23/2012)

Presidential debate 2012: 7 takeaways.” (Politico, 10/23/2012)

Obama and Romney Bristle From Start Over Foreign Policy.” (New York Times, 10/22/2012)

Romney Disappoints GOP Base.” (Mother Jones, 10/22/2012)

[Video] “Obama To Romney: The 1980s Called — They Want Their Foreign Policy Back.” (Talking Points Memo, 10/22/2012)

Pre-Debate:

5 Facts To Commit To Memory Before Tonight’s Foreign Policy Debate.” (Think Progress, 10/22/2012)

6 questions that will settle the election.” (Politico, 10/22/2012)

Foreign Policy Debate Puts Focus on Leadership.” (New York Times, 10/22/2012)

Obama vs. Romney: How they plan to win.” (Politico, 10/22/2012)

Presidential debate: 5 things to watch Monday.” (Politico, 10/22/2012)

German Language Debate Coverage:

Drittes Fernsehduell: Romney grenzt sich ab – gegen Obamas Vorgänger.” (FAZ, 23.10.2012)

Letzte TV-Debatte: Staatsmann Obama landet Punktsieg.” (Zeit Online, 23.10.2012)

TV-Duell : Obama punktet mit Souveränität.” (taz, 23.10.2012)

[Podcast] “Swingin’ America – Endspurt im Wahlkampf.” (hr2 Der Tag, 22.10.2012)

Countdown zur US-Wahl: Noch 17 Tage: Wie Twitter den US-Wahlkampf banalisiert.” (Malte Lehming, Tagesspiegel, 20.10.2012)

Background information:

[Podcast] “Obama Plans Another Campaign Marathon For Monday.” (npr, 11/05/2012)

[Podcast] “Red State Blue State.” (This American Life Episode 478, 11/01/2012) – This episode covers how the current hyperpolarized political climate in the US affects families and friends who find themselves in opposite political camps.

Democracy denied: Millions of Americans blocked from voting.” (Al Jazeera English, 10/28/2012)

A Comprehensive Timeline Of Mitt Romney’s Foreign Policy Positions During The Campaign.” (Think Progress, 10/22/2012)

The Federal Bailout That Saved Mitt Romney.” (Rolling Stone, 08/29/2012)

[Podcast] “For Many Florida Ex-Cons, Voting Booth Is Off-Limits.” (npr, 10/22/2012)

U.S. Foreign Policy Data Roundup: Candidates and Issues.” (Gallup, 10/22/2012)

An update on the electoral map after the first presidential debate from Talking Points Memo (October 16, 2012):

[Infographic] Here you can find the electoral map from the New York Times.

3 states that may decide the election.” (Politico, 10/15/2012) – Ohio, Florida and Virginia

The Catholic ‘Swing’ Vote.” (Pew, 10/11/2012)

[Podcast] “Science and the 2012 Election.” (Point of Inquiry, 10/15/2012)  – A discussion about the candidates’ positions on matters of science

Debates: Leaked Debate Agreement Shows Both Obama and Romney are Sniveling Cowards.” (Gawker, 10/15/2012)

[Podcast] “All That Stuff Before The Debate.” (My History Can Beat Up Your Politics, 09/12/2012) – A discussion about the intensely scripted nature of presidential debates

[Video] “As Obama, Romney Hold First Debate, Behind the Secret GOP-Dem Effort to Shut Out Third Parties.” (Democracy Now, 10/03/2012)

Do the US presidential debates matter?” (BBC News, 10/03/2012)

Election 2012: Your Free Ticket to a Popular Stanford Course.” —Stanford University lets you watch a lecture series about this year’s presidential election and broader themes behind political campaigns in the US (via Open Culture)

First Debate Often Helps Challenger in Polls.” (New York Times, 10/03/2012)

[Audio] “How Politicians Get Away With Dodging The Question.” (npr, 10/03/2012)

[Podcast] “How Presidential Debates Work.” (Stuff You Should Know, 11/10/2011)

How Presidential Debates Work.” (HowStuffWorks, 10/13/2010)

[Memes] “2012 United States Presidential Election.” (Know Your Meme) – The Internet is even capable of exploiting the funny bits of presidential elections

German Language Background information:

Amerika wählt: Was sind die Swing States?” (FAZ, 06.11.2012)

[Podcast] “Harvard-Ökonom: US-Mittelschicht steht immer mehr unter Druck.” (Deutschlandradio Kultur, Ortszeit, 05.11.2012)

[Podcast] “Praise The Lord! Aber nur, wenn’s opportun ist.” (Deutschlandradio Kultur, Politisches Feuilleton, 05.11.2012) – Wie amerikanische Politiker Religion für den Wahlkampf nutzen

[Podcast] “USA vor der Wahl – wohin steuert die Supermacht?” (Deutschlandfunk Kontrovers, 05.11.2012)

Prognose zur künftigen US-Politik: So sieht Amerikas Zukunft aus.” (Spiegel Online, 04.11.2012)

[Podcast] “Romney versus Obama: Die USA vor der Präsidentschaftswahl.” (Deutschlandfunk, Hintergrund, 04.11.2012)

[Audio] “US-Wahlsystem verständlich erklärt.” (MDR Info, 02.11.2012)

[Podcast] “Sondersendung mit Rop Gonggrijp über die US-Wahlen und Wahlfälschung.” (Alternativlos Folge 28, 01.11.2012)

[Podcast] “Das Streben nach Glück – Anspruch und Wirklichkeit: Amerika vor der Wahl.” (Deutschlandradio Kultur Lesart, 28.10.2012) – Die Diskussionsrunde nimmt Bezug auf Mark Twains kürzlich nach hundert Jahren der Geheimhaltung veröffentlichten “Geheimen Biographie” sowie David Remnicks Obama-Biographie “Die Brücke – Barack Obama und die Vollendung der schwarzen Bürgerrechtsbewegung”, im Original “The Bridge – The Life and Rise of Barack Obama” (2010).

[Video/Podcast] “Brennpunkt USA – Eine intellektuelle Spurensuche.” (Schweizer Fernsehen, Sternstunde Philosophie, 24.10.2012) – In der philosophischen Sendung des Schweizer Fernsehens interviewt Barbara Blasch amerikanische Intellektuelle wie Noam Chomsky, Katja Vogt und Michael Walzer zur Lage der Nation kurz vor der Präsidentschaftswahl 2012. Auch als Audioversion im Podcast-Feed der Sendung.

Debattenkultur: Warum wir Amis keine kritischen Denker sind.” (Zeit Online, 02.10.2012)

 

Round 2: Ryan vs. Biden (10 October 2012)

The second televised debate of the 2012 presidential elections is scheduled for tonight (Thursday, 11 October, 2012), featuring Vice President Joe Biden and challenger Paul Ryan. After the last debate between President Obama and Mitt Romney, which a majority of commentators from all sides saw as a victory (at least on style) for Romney, it is going to be quite interesting to see, in my opinion, what debate strategy the Obama camp will choose this time around.

9 Ways to Watch the Vice Presidential Debate Online.” (Mashable, 2012/10/11)

C-SPAN has the debate here.

The YouTube election hub has a live stream of the debates here.

You can also watch the complete first Biden-Ryan debate at the New York Times, which has a nifty running transcript next to the video.

Here is the full debate, courtesy of the YouTube Politics channel:

Here is a brief update from Talking Points Memo about the state of public opinion polls before the Biden-Ryan debate (2012/10/10):

Fact-checking Websites:

factcheck.org

politifact.com

Veep Debate Violations: Ryan, Biden rough up the facts in their one and only meeting.” (FactCheck, 10/12/2012)

Fact-checking the vice presidential debate.” (PolitiFact, 10/11/2012)

Vice-Presidential Debate Fact-Checks and Updates.“(New York Times)

What Everyone Needs To Know Before Watching The VP Debate.” -Paul Ryans positions and actions prior to the debate, with linked sources. (Think Progress, 10/10/2012)

How to Prime Your BS Detection Skills Before the Presidential Debates.” (Lifehacker, 10/03/2012)

Debate Coverage:

[Op-ed] “Blame Obama For Libya, But Don’t Blame Bush For 9/11.” (Slate, 10/16/2012) – “[T]he Republican Party line [in 2002] was that anyone who accused the president of neglect or deceit was unpatriotic.”

Biden, Ryan Square Off on Foreign Policy, Economy in Debate.” (Wall Street Journal, 10/12/2012)

[Op-ed] “The Vice Presidential Debate: Joe Biden Was Right to Laugh.” (Rolling Stone, 10/12/2012)

Vice presidential debate: 7 takeaways from Danville.” (Politico, 10/12/2012)

6 Must-See Moments from the Vice-Presidential Debate.” (Daily Beast, 10/11/2012)

Biden Pins Ryan Down On Taxes: ‘Oh, Now You’re Jack Kennedy?’” (Talking Points Memo, 10/11/2012)

Biden v. Ryan: The Old Pro Takes On the Lying Kid.” (Alternet, 10/11/2012)

Joe Biden Addresses 47 Percent During Vice Presidential Debate.” (Huffington Post, 10/11/2012)

Joe Biden goes after Paul Ryan in lone VP debate.” (Politico, 10/11/2012)

Joe Biden’s Passion Trumps Paul Ryan at Vice-Presidential Debate” (Daily Beast, 10/11/2012)

[Video] “Woman At VP Debate Calls Obama A Communist.” (Talking Points Memo, 10/11/2012)

5 things to watch in VP debate.” (Politico, 10/11/2012)

Six Things to Watch For in Biden-Ryan Debate.” (New York Times, 10/10/2012)

German Coverage:

US-Wahlkampf: Biden punktet im TV-Duell gegen Ryan.” (Zeit Online, 12.10.2012)

TV-Debatte der Stellvertreter im US-Wahlkampf – Biden dominiert das Unentschieden.” (Süddeutsche Zeitung, 11.10.2012)

Background information:

Pre-Debate, Biden, Ryan Share Lackluster Favorable Ratings.” (Gallup, 10/11/2012)

Vice Presidential Debates Rarely Influence Voters.” (Gallup, 10/10/2012)

[Podcast] “When Veeps Attack.” (My History Can Beat Up Your Politics, 10/07/2012) -A discussion of the history of vice presidents and their challengers in American presidential debates

[Podcast] “How Presidential Debates Work.” (Stuff You Should Know, 11/10/2011)

How Presidential Debates Work.” (HowStuffWorks, 10/13/2000)

German Language Background information:

Das Streben nach Glück – Anspruch und Wirklichkeit: Amerika vor der Wahl.” (Deutschlandradio Kultur, 28.10.2012) – Die Diskussionsrunde nimmt Bezug auf Mark Twains kürzlich nach hundert Jahren der Geheimhaltung veröffentlichten “Geheimen Biographie” sowie David Remnicks Obama-Biographie “Die Brücke – Barack Obama und die Vollendung der schwarzen Bürgerrechtsbewegung”, im Original “The Bridge – The Life and Rise of Barack Obama” (2010).

Debattenkultur: Warum wir Amis keine kritischen Denker sind.” (Zeit Online, 02.10.2012)

The Voting Rights Act of 1965: 47th Anniversary (2012)

Fourty-seven years ago, on August 6, 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act, which strengthened the rights of African Americans to cast their ballot—after highly-visible violent crackdowns on peaceful civil rights activists in Alabama and immense pressure in their aftermath.1 Even though the Fifteenth Amendment to the US Constitution, passed in 1870 as part of the Reconstruction Amendments shortly after the American Civil War, had on paper secured African Americans’ right to vote, the following century was marked by disenfranchisement through both legal tactics, such as literacy tests, but also mob violence, especially in the US South. In recent times, a push for stricter voter identification laws in some places has reignited the debate about voting rights.

Here is an excerpt of Johnson’s speech before Congress on the matter of voting rights in 1965:

Here is the full speech and its transcript at the University of Virginia’s Miller Center.

Further reading:

The Voting Rights Act of 1965:

Transcript of Voting Rights Act (1965) (ourdocuments.gov)
The Most Important Voting Rights Law In American History Turns 47 Today (Think Progress)
The Voting Rights Act: A 20th Century American Revolution (American Prospect)
The Voting Rights Act of 1965 (US Department of Justice)

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 and Recent Political Debate On Voter Identification Laws (some op-eds included):

Al Sharpton: Protecting the Voting Rights (LA Times)
Congressional Black Caucus Holds Faith Leaders Summit on Voting Rights (C-SPAN)
Charles Postel: Why voter ID laws are like a poll tax (Politico)
Eric Holder: Voter ID Laws Threaten Voting Rights (Huffington Post)
Eric Holder: The Right’s New Boogeyman (The Nation)
Eric Holder wades into debate over voting rights as presidential election nears (Washington Post)
Holder’s Racial Incitement (Wall Street Journal)
New Target In Voter ID Battle: 1965 Voting Rights Act (NPR)
Texas to test 1965 voting rights law in court (Reuters)
U.S. voting rights under siege (CNN)
The Voting Rights Act: Our Last Best Hope (Huffington Post)
Voting Rights Act: Remember, Celebrate and Protect (Huffington Post)
Voting Rights Act under siege (Politico)
Voting Rights, Voter Suppression and 2012
(NY Times)

  1. For Johnson’s track record on race, see Robert Caro, “Johnson’s Dream, Obama’s Speech.” NY Times, August 27, 2008.

Supreme Court Upholds Health Care Reform

On June 28, 2012, the Supreme Court upheld President Obama’s health care reform, stating that the individual health care mandate was a legal form of taxation. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. enabled the 5 to 4 vote by joining the liberal side of the court.

Because the Constitution permits such a tax, it is not our role to forbid it, or to pass upon its wisdom or fairness.
– Chief Justice John Roberts

This article from Politico has a handy chart that shows how the health care law looks like after the ruling.

The cause of repealing ‘Obamacare’ had been a key mobilizing issue for the GOP and the Tea Party Movement since the law was enacted in 2010.

Here is an incomplete collection of news articles on the Supreme Court’s ruling:

NY Times here, Washington Post here, Huffington Post here, Wall St. Journal here, Politico here and here (key quotes from the ruling), SCOTUSblog here, Think Progress here, USA Today here, Daily Beast here.

Politico’s analysis of Justive Roberts’ motivations can be read here. In brief, some professional observers think that the conservative-leaning Roberts’ surprising decision has to do with creating his own legacy, a “Roberts Court,” and deflecting critics’ arguments about a Supreme Court characterized by conservative judicial activism.

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who had introduced an almost identical individual health care mandate in Massachusetts as Governor, continues to campaign on repealing ‘Obamacare’ despite the fact that he had earlier advocated for the Massachusetts health care reform to become a model for national health care reform.

The Obama administration highlights this inconvenient fact in their campaign ads against Romney.

One of Romney’s arguments is that “Obamacare adds trillions to our deficits and to our national debt.” The fact-checking website PolitiFact rates Romney’s statement as ‘false.’

At Politiwhoops, a website of the Sunlight Foundation, you can read all the tweets deleted by politicians who were against the health care reform. Some of them falsely tweeted that the Supreme Court had repealed the individual mandate.

When in the US, Dress Like a Nurse, When in Germany, Be a Firefighter!

*'''Description:''' Rettung von Verletzten bei einer Einsatzübung der Freiwilligen Feuerwehr Dußlingen (Baden-Württemberg), LIZENZFREI, fotografiert und freigegeben von Alexander Blum (www.alexanderblum.de) *'''Source:''' German Wikipedia, original upl
Firefighters: The most trusted professional group in Germany.

That is the conclusion you could draw from reading two recent polls, one from Gallup asking Americans,1 and a second one from GfK asking Germans 2 about their trust in various professional groups.

 

The five most trusted professions
United States Germany
Nurses (84%) Firefighters (98%)
Pharmacists (73%) Medical doctors (89%)
Medical doctors (70%) Post office workers (86%)
High school teachers (62%) Police officers (85%)
Police officers (54%) Teachers (84%)

The five least trusted professions:

The five least trusted professions
United States Germany
Members of Congress  (64% ‘Very Low’ or ‘Low’) Politicians (91% ‘Distrust)
Lobbyists (62%) Corporate Managers (80%)
Telemarketers 53%) Advertising executives (67%)
Car salespeople (47%) Marketing executives (62%)
Labor union leaders (41%) Journalists (56%)

Conclusion

If you were a shameless impostor who wants to gain the the local population’s trust quickly (which I am certain you are not), you might go for the nurse outfit (in the US) or the firefighter look (in Germany). As an alternative, you could also consider wearing a white lab coat and/or a stethoscope (works in both countries). A police uniform might also help, although I do not recommend this—it is likely to be illegal. If you, American traveler, would like to enchant Germans, why not try post office chic? In both countries, If you carry around a few textbooks, you could pass for a teacher. People may like you for it.

Whether you walk the streets of Berlin or Washington, avoid looking like a person who just walked out of Congress or the Bundestag. And to you, German tourist, do not even think of starting the casual conversation by trying to sell a car!

  1. Jones, Jeffrey M. “Record 64% Rate Honesty, Ethics of Members of Congress Low.” Gallup. 12 Dec. 2011. Web. 3 June 2012.
  2. GfK. “Vertrauen in Verschiedene Berufsgruppen.” Statista. June 2011. Web. 24 May 2012.

Tobias Endler: US Foreign Policy After 9/11 (Leipzig Book Fair 2012 Update 1)

Now that the Leipzig Book Fair 2012 (Leipziger Buchmesse) is over, I would like to share some thoughts about my impressions. There was so much to see that any attempt at catching everything of interest was doomed to failure. Nevertheless, I managed to attend some of the readings supported by the US Consulate Leipzig, as mentioned in my earlier post.

On Thursday, March 15, I went to see Tobias Endler of the Heidelberg Center for American Studies (HCA) presenting his book After 9/11: Leading Political Thinkers about the World, the U.S. and Themselves.

The book is based on a collection of interviews that Endler conducted with a variety American public intellectuals across the political spectrum. These public figures talked at length about how they imagine the role of the US as the remaining superpower after the Cold War.

Endler mentioned that the trauma of 9/11 is still present and informs national discourse in the US. He pointed to the 2012 Republican presidential primaries which had currently reached several Southern states in the US. Within the campaign rhetoric of the current crop of candidates, both the tropes of a potential Iranian nuclear threat and the fear of terrorism featured prominently.

Endler also talked about a specifically American “revolving door of public life,” a phenomenon wherein university professors often transfer to governmental posts, then to think tanks, and finally back to university or into journalism.

This mechanism, which is often difficult to understand from a German perspective, leads to a lively public debate in the US.

The discourses of public intellectuals in the US focus on such topics as the role of the US as a superpower, or the ability to survive crises.

Endler mentioned that in the public discourse, 9/11 entailed a sense of loss of the “free” US security provided by its geographic location. 9/11 was registered as the first attack on US territory since two hundred years, except for the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor during World War II.

Since 9/11, the US government has been willing to defend what it defines as American values with military force. This rationale has been put forward by the Bush administration, but also has been acknowledged by President Obama.

Endler mentioned that a look back at the past three years of the Obama administration reveals a shift towards “realism” in its foreign policy approach.

From a German perspective, he noted, US public debate often looks like a traveling circus, and seems rather strange. From the American perspective, on the other hand, this willingness to controversial discussion is seen as embodiment of democracy.

This also includes public opinion about the president, as documented by polls. Endler pointed out that recent polls show diverging evaluations of Obama as person and Obama as politician. While Obama as a person still gets relatively high approval ratings, Obama the politician is seen comparatively worse by the American public. The president also still has an image problem as he is seen as “elitist” by large parts of the population.

Endler also mentioned that in comparison, the political spectrum of the US is generally more to the right of Germany.

A few examples from the interviews with US public intellectuals underscored this point. For instance, he mentioned Michael Novak of the conservative think tank American Enterprise Institute (AEI), whom he characterized as an archconservative Catholic who forms a bridge between the Christian Right and neoconservatives. Novak thought of Obama as an extreme leftist.

Endler described how many conservative public intellectuals in the US also see Obama as “great nibbler” who hesitates to tackle problems of foreign policy at the root.

On the other end of the left-right spectrum, Endler gave the example of MIT linguist and icon of the US Left, Noam Chomsky. Chomsky told Endler that there was no substantial debate going on in the US. In his opinion, the educated classes are indoctrinated. Chomsky noted broad support for the US invasion of Iraq, and the absence of a “principled objective” to invading other countries. According to Chomsky, there exists a double standard for other countries’ invasions of foreign countries. In Chomsky’s view, the nature of the discourse on the invasion of Iraq was such that the only question asked was “Does it cost US too much?”

Endler pointed out that foreign policy generally plays a small role in US elections and that war fatigue has risen among the US  public. One case in point, Endler argued, was President Obama’s 2012 State of the Union address, which did not discuss foreign policy matters.

In Endler’s opinion, the dialogue between the US and the EU has been set aback lately.

He concluded that there is by and large a consensus across the political spectrum in American public debate about the status of the US as a superpower and the benefit of exporting democracy.

I found the talk very interesting, but it was unfortunately a bit short, as the whole event including introduction and questions at the end had to fit into a thirty minute time slot. I certainly would have liked to hear more about certain aspects of current US foreign policy, especially the aforementioned ‘realist’ turn of the Obama administration.

As the audience of a reading at the Leipzig Book Fair is much broader than merely American studies people, it is certainly sensible to not dwell on details only of interest to (aspiring) specialists. I am of course biased here and would have gladly taken in some more information. Then again, I am probably a little spoiled by attending readings at my university, which usually have the luxury of a ninety minute time slot.

Overall, the talk got me interested and I will put the book on my to-read list.