What record Boeing-Indonesia deal means

The largest single aviation purchase in Boeing's 94-year history was pulled off today by Lion Air.

Lion who?

If you have never heard of Lion Air, you're not alone. Unless you speak Bahasa Indonesia and have traveled around the vast array of islands that make up the world's most populous Muslim nation, there is no reason why you should have.

With U.S. President Barack Obama watching on the sidelines of the ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) economic summit in Bali, Lion Air signed a deal for 230 Boeing planes totaling $21.7 billion, with the first delivery in 2017 -- part of the airline's plan to buy 408 new planes at $37.7 billion, Lion Air CEO Rusdy Kirana told CNN.

"From east to west, Indonesia spans 5,000 miles and we have 230 million (people) and not enough aircraft to meet the growth of the number of passengers," Kirana said.
Right now, the airline has only a few routes that take it out of Indonesia to Southeast Asian neighbors Singapore, Malaysia and Vietnam. The airline plans to use the new fleet to both expand routes among the 6,000 inhabited islands in Indonesia as well as new routes to Japan, South Korea, China and Taiwan.

While the developed world has been pummeled with recession, stagnant growth and rising debt burdens in the wake of the 2007-2008 Financial Crisis, developing powerhouses like Indonesia have continued to rise.

Indonesia's economic output was $706.6 billion in 2010, up from just $95.4 billion in 1998 when the nation was embroiled in the Asian Financial Crisis, which led to the end of the longtime dictatorship of Indonesian President Suharto. His departure led the way for economic and political reform in the world's fourth most populous nation.

The soaring fortunes of Indonesia echoes the number of Indonesians taking to the skies -- this year, the numbers traveling by air within the country is expected to rise 15%, the Indonesian Transportation Ministry said.

"As Indonesia's middle class increases in number, more and more people will be traveling throughout the archipelago," said Indonesian Foreign Minister Marty Natalegawa. "And the easiest way to travel is air transport, and so that why I think the projection ahead will be quite promising, and offer many opportunities for many."

For Obama, the record deal helped him underline a message he's echoed during his Asian trip: That strong economic ties with Asia creates jobs at home.

"For the last several days, I've been talking about how we have to make sure that we've got a presence in this region, that it can result directly in jobs at home," Obama said in a statement. "And what we see here -- a multibillion-dollar deal between Lion Air -- one of the fastest-growing airlines not just in the region, but in the world -- and Boeing is going to result in over 100,000 jobs back in the United States of America, over a long period of time."

When asked why Lion Air chose Boeing over arch rival, French-made Airbus, CEO Kirana told CNN: "There's not much difference between Airbus and Boeing. It's like a person choosing what to eat. you just prefer one dish over another."

Executives at Boeing are no doubt pleased the Indonesian airline prefers to supper in Seattle rather than dine in France. And as fortunes rise on the archipelago, many more western companies will try to find a place at Indonesia's table.

U.S. and Australia announce greater military cooperation

The United States announced an agreement with Australia Wednesday that will expand military cooperation between the long-time allies and boost America's presence in the region.

The agreement was revealed during a joint news conference between U.S. President Barack Obama and Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard in the nation's capital, Canberra.

Obama is on a two-day trip to Australia, his first visit as commander-in-chief.

"I am very pleased that we are able to make these announcements here together on Australian soil," Obama said. "Because of these initiatives that are the result of our countries working very closely together as partners, we are going to be in a position to more effectively strengthen the security of both of our nations and this region."
President Obama arrives in Australia
Obama stresses Asia-Pacific importance

Under the agreement, up to 250 U.S. Marines will be sent to Darwin and the northern region of Australia for military exercises and training. Over the next several years their numbers are expected to climb to 2,500 -- a full Marine ground task force.

While U.S. officials cited the need to respond to regional natural disasters as a reason for the agreement, concern over China's military expansion is widely acknowledged as a driving factor.

"What we look at is how does our general force posture allow us to protect U.S. interests, protect our allies, and ... secure the region broadly," Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes told reporters traveling with the president. "China is obviously a piece of the Asia Pacific region, an emerging power."

Rhodes later added that the deal is "part of the U.S. sending a signal that we're going to be present, that we're going to continue to play the role of underpinning security in this part of the region. Part of that context is a rising China."

Analysts note that the deal sends a message to China in a less confrontational way than building up bases closer to Chinese shores.

"The Chinese can squawk about it," said Patrick Cronin, senior director of the Asia-Pacific Security Program at the Center for a New American Security. "But it's not like having an aircraft carrier in the Yellow Sea."

Obama himself, however, insisted during his news conference that "the notion that we fear China is mistaken."

The president's Australian visit -- postponed twice in 2009 and 2010 due to an oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico and other domestic political considerations -- highlights a changing balance of power in the Pacific as China expands its military reach and the United States works to reduce its military footprint in Japan.

Obama's Australian visit comes on the heels of last weekend's 19-nation Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit, which highlighted the need for new measures supporting job growth. During the Hawaiian summit, Obama stressed the importance of the Pacific to global economic security, and he pushed China to do more to help strengthen the world economy.

After wrapping up his visit to Australia, Obama will conclude his Pacific trip with a stop in Indonesia -- a country he spent several years living in during his childhood.

Obama pushes the trans-Pacific trade deal at APEC

President Barack Obama, in Hawaii for a weekend economic conference, said Saturday that leaders of nine nations have agreed on the "broad outlines" of a trans-Pacific free trade agreement.

The United States has been negotiating with Australia, New Zealand, Malaysia, Brunei Darussalam, Singapore, Vietnam, Chile and Peru to develop the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), which officials have said could eventually expand to include other nations.

Speaking at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Honolulu, Obama pushed the expanded trade deal as a way to help boost investment and exports, create jobs, and "compete and win in the markets of the future."

The president is on a nine-day trip through the Asia-Pacific region that will include stops in Australia and Indonesia.

"I'm very pleased to announce that our nine nations have reached the broad outlines of an agreement. There are still plenty of details to work out, but we are confident that we can do so. So we've directed our teams to finalize this agreement in the coming year. It is an ambitious goal, but we are optimistic that we can get it done," he said, according to remarks provided by his office.

The next round of negotiations is scheduled for early next month.

Obama said the TPP has the potential to be a model for future trade agreements elsewhere in the world, as it will address issues not covered in previous pacts. It will ensure that state-owned enterprises compete fairly with private companies and address trade and investment in digital technologies.

Obama's administration is taking care to highlight the importance of strong Asia-Pacific relations to the president's efforts to create jobs domestically.

"The U.S. exports to this region are essential to the president's goal of doubling U.S. exports in the next several years," Ben Rhodes, deputy national security adviser for strategic communications, told reporters in a briefing this week. "In fact, nearly all of the efforts that we're going to be making towards that export goal take place in this part of the world."

The 21 members of APEC account for 55% of the world's gross domestic product, 43% of world trade and 58% of U.S. exports, according to the group.

"So I think when the American people see the president traveling in the Asia-Pacific, they will see him advocating for U.S. jobs and U.S. businesses," Rhodes said. "He will be trying to open new markets, and he will be trying to achieve new export initiatives, and he will be trying to foster a trade agreement through the, for instance, the Trans-Pacific Partnership, that takes us beyond the Korea Free Trade Agreement towards a multilateral agreement that, again, has very high standards to ensure that our interests are being protected."

During the weekend conference, Obama was also scheduled to have a discussion with business leaders, as well as side meetings with Russian President Dimitry Medvedev and Chinese President Hu Jintao. Obama met with Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda on Saturday.

After a break Monday for a political fundraiser, Obama is scheduled to depart Tuesday for Australia and later Bali, Indonesia, where he will stress the U.S. role in the Asia-Pacific region and seek to reassure U.S. allies of the nation's continued commitment to the region, Rhodes said.

Speaking to business leaders on Saturday, the president addressed the need to campaign aggressively on behalf of the United States to boost business.

"We've been a little bit lazy, I think, over the last couple of decades. We've kind of taken for granted -- well, people will want to come here and we aren't out there hungry, selling America and trying to attract new business into America," he said. "We can do much better than we're doing right now."

Obama reveals new refinance rules at Western trip start

President Barack Obama traveled to Las Vegas on Monday to launch a Western trip that mixes campaigning with presidential business -- and an appearance on "The Tonight Show."

After a campaign event at The Bellagio hotel and casino Monday afternoon, Obama met with homeowners at a private residence to announce new efforts to help homeowners with refinancing.

The government's Home Affordable Refinance Program will be changed to make it easier for homeowners to capitalize on current low interest rates by refinancing old, high-interest mortgages.

The new rules will allow homeowners who owe more than 125% of the market value of their homes to get the new loans.

"So let me just give you an example. If you've got a $250,000 mortgage at 6 percent interest rates, but the value of your home has fallen below $200,000, right now you can't refinance. You're ineligible," Obama said, according to a copy of his remarks released by the White House.

"But that's going to change. If you meet certain requirements, you will have the chance to refinance at lower rates, which could save you hundreds of dollars a month, and thousands of dollars a year on mortgage payments."

In addition, Obama told the gathering,"there are going to be lower closing costs, and certain refinancing fees will be eliminated -- fees that can sometimes cancel out the benefits of refinancing altogether." The changes also will allow consumers to shop around for better rates beyond their original lenders, he said.

Learn why the program probably won't help the real estate market

The president then traveled to Los Angeles, where he was expected to deliver remarks at two more campaign events.
On Tuesday, Obama will tape an appearance on "The Tonight Show with Jay Leno," according to the White House.

The last time the president appeared on the show, in March 2009, he caused controversy by attempting to poke fun at his poor bowling skills -- evident during a 2008 campaign stop. He told Leno he bowled 129 in the White House bowling alley and said his bowling skills were "like Special Olympics or something."

Before the show aired, the president called Special Olympics Chairman Tim Shriver to apologize, White House officials said, and stress his intention was not to humiliate the disabled. Shriver called Obama's apology "sincere and heartfelt," but noted in a written response, "This is a teachable moment for our country."

After the "Tonight Show" taping, Obama will travel to San Francisco for a fundraiser, according to the White House. On Tuesday night, he will be in Denver to push his jobs agenda. Other private fundraisers will also be sprinkled in, officials said.

A Democratic official estimates the campaign will haul in more than $4 million from six fundraisers in three states.

It's the second time in less than a month that Obama has headed west to push for jobs and raise campaign cash.

A senior campaign official noted the importance of spending time in the region, saying the "campaign has already established an extensive operation in Western states."

And they expect to make "heavy investments there."

The official singled out Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico and Arizona, where the campaign has offices and field staff.

In 2008 Obama won decisively in Nevada, Colorado and New Mexico, but lost to Republican John McCain in McCain's home state of Arizona.

This time around the economy remains under heavy downward pressure despite efforts by the Obama administration to turn things around.

In Nevada, home prices have plummeted by 53% since the peak, and according to online real estate site Zillow, 85% of the state's homeowners owe more than their homes are worth.

At his fundraiser at the Bellagio Hotel in Las Vegas Monday, the president acknowledged that "things are tough right now," but he reminded the audience of some 300 supporters of his accomplishments.

"As tough as things are right now, we were able to stabilize this economy and make sure it didn't go into a great depression," the president said.

While the campaign is targeting key Western states, officials realize every vote will be critical.

"Our goal in 2011 is to build the biggest organization possible to compete on the widest playing field possible in 2012," the campaign official said.

Obama risks Iraq for the political expediency

In his first inaugural address in 1953, newly elected President Dwight D. Eisenhower told the American people, "History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid. We must acquire proficiency in defense and display stamina in purpose." This was a fitting and powerful response to the popular noninterventionism current of the 1950s from a five-star general who knew how to win a war.

The first and most important job of the president is to be commander in chief. Eisenhower knew that, as so did many of our great presidents. Today, we are in danger of losing that founding virtue.

President Obama's decision to order a full withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of the year will most likely lead to disaster. He greatly risks losing a country in which we have invested so much time, resources and, most importantly, human life. And he risks losing it to Iran, the world's largest sponsor of terrorism and our primary enemy in a serious Middle East proxy war.
"The long war in Iraq will come to an end by the end of this year," Obama said Friday. It may come to an end for our troops, but it is far from over for the people of Iraq.

Only very few of the loudest opponents of the Iraq war advocated complete withdrawal. The U.S. military commanders recommended at least 15,000 troops remain. Obama once again ignored his generals, as he did with Afghanistan, and instead pressed ahead with a politically calculated decision.

Another view: "Who lost Iraq" is the wrong question

Perhaps this will gain him praise from the far left of his base, but this will not sit well with a vast majority of the American people. More than 4,000 Americans have died in the Iraq war.

The American people have been impatient with the war, but they know we were successful in Iraq. To throw this all away for political expediency is irresponsible. To be tired is one thing, to be irresolute is another. The frequent refrain of Osama bin Laden was that he could always wait us out and that we would eventually show ourselves to be the weak horse, not the strong horse. And, God forbid, if we lose Iraq, it will be on the shoulders of the commander in chief.

Under Obama's plan, a mere 160 U.S. troops would stay in Iraq to guard the U.S. Embassy. That is hardly enough troops to defend our own people. For comparison, the United States has 1,234 troops in Belgium, 1,894 troops in Bahrain and 678 troops in Qatar, according to the Department of Defense's active-duty military personnel records. We risk another Saigon moment by evacuating Iraq and leaving no support behind.

On my radio show, "Morning In America," Michael Rubin, who is the American Enterprise Institute's Middle East expert and teaches our troops at the Naval Postgraduate School, said with no qualifications that he thinks we will lose Iraq because of this.

Dan Senor, senior adviser and the chief spokesman for the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq in 2003-2004, told me that the president's decision shocked and perplexed him. Iraq cannot survive sectarian violence and Iranian influence on its own, he added. Baghdad will surely move closer to Tehran in our absence.

Indeed, one can already see the influence of Tehran. Two weeks ago, Iraq publicly defended the actions of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, an early and telling sign that Iraq was preparing for the withdrawal of American forces. The Iranians want influence in Iraq; Obama wants out of Iraq.

The president defends his actions on the basis of his campaign pledge to withdraw all U.S. troops from Iraq and former President George W. Bush's withdrawal timeline of 2011. However, just until last week, the Obama administration was negotiating the Status of Forces Agreement with Nuri al-Maliki's government with the understanding that several thousand troops would remain in Iraq -- a clear break from his campaign pledge. More importantly, total troop withdrawal was never a platform of Bush's withdrawal timetable.

We know that Tehran is celebrating the president's announcement. Just weeks after spoiling an Iranian plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador in Washington, D.C., the United States will withdraw from its strongest post from which to engage Iran. We have given them an open road to Baghdad and unfettered weapons supply lines to Syria and Lebanon. By ceding Iran the high ground, the Obama administration has also undercut American and Israeli efforts to shut down Iran's nuclear weapons program.

In spite of all this, Obama will spend his re-election campaign trotting out his foreign policy accomplishments. He deserves credit where it is due. Osama bin Laden, Anwar al-Awlaki and Moammar Gadhafi are dead. But should we see the loss of Iraq and the rise of Iran, all this will be for naught.

President Obama rips GOP opposition to jobs bill

President Barack Obama took the push for his stalled $447 billion jobs plan on the road Monday, telling a North Carolina audience that alternative proposals put forward by his Republican critics amount to little more than sops to the rich that will gut critical regulations and fail to restore economic growth.
My "bill will help put people back to work and give our economy a boost right away," Obama told the crowd at Asheville Regional Airport. "But apparently none of this matters" to GOP leaders.
"I've gone out of my way to find areas of cooperation" with congressional Republicans, the president declared. "We're going to give members of Congress another chance to step up to the plate and do the right thing."

But "if they vote against these proposals again ... then they're not going to have to answer to me. They're going to have to answer to you," he said.
Since Obama's plan was rejected in the Senate -- due to unanimous GOP opposition -- Democratic leaders have decided to try to move it through Congress by breaking it up into a series of smaller legislative proposals.

But Obama's appearance, analysts note, was as much about campaign politics as the bill. The president will spend the next three days on a bus tour through politically pivotal North Carolina and Virginia -- two states carried by Obama in 2008 but considered up for grabs next year.
The crowd repeatedly chanted "four more years" before and during Obama's remarks.
"I appreciate the 'four more years,' but right now I'm thinking about the next 13 months," Obama said. "We don't have time to wait. We've got a choice right now."
Jobs bill fight continues after Senate defeat
Obama's senior strategist, David Axelrod, vowed Sunday that every part of the bill will eventually have a vote.

"The American people support every single plank of that bill, and we're going to vote on every single one of them," Axelrod said on ABC's "This Week."
He would not say which part of the plan would come first.
Republicans will "get a vote on whether they believe we should protect tax breaks for small business owners and middle-class Americans, or whether we should protect tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires," Obama said in a written statement last Tuesday.
Monthlong protests show no sign of abating
Meanwhile, demonstrators in Southern California say they'll gather Monday to protest the GOP's stance on the president's jobs bill. House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and California Reps. Dana Rohrabacher and Ed Royce will be together in the area for a fund-raising event.
"Members of the Courage Campaign, teachers and health care workers will deliver a petition to Speaker Boehner signed by 25,000 Courage Campaign members ... demanding that he hold a vote on President Obama's American Jobs Act," a statement from the demonstrators said.
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Virginia, indicated over the weekend that there could be agreement on some elements.
"Let's work together. Let's find some of the things in his plan that we agree with and let's go ahead and do that for the American people," he told "Fox News Sunday."
The past week was an indication that "we can come together," Cantor said, citing the passage of three trade bills.

Cantor did not make clear exactly where areas of agreement may be. But he cited the need to help small businesses find capital, unemployment insurance reform, and infrastructure spending as broad ideas for which both sides have expressed support.
But "we're not going to be for tax increases on small businesses," Cantor said of the president's plan.
Republicans filibustered the Senate version of the president's jobs bill last week, though a handful of Democrats had said they would have opposed the measure if it had made it to the chamber's floor.
Among other things, Obama's overall blueprint includes an extension and expansion of the current payroll tax cut, an extension of jobless benefits, new tax credits for businesses that hire the long-term unemployed, and additional money to help save and create jobs for teachers and first responders such as firefighters.

The largest measure in the package is the payroll tax cut, which comes at a projected cost of $265 billion. Employees normally pay 6.2% on their first $106,800 of wages into Social Security, but they are now paying only 4.2%. That break is set to expire at the end of December. Obama wants to cut the tax in half, to 3.1%.

Republicans previously embraced the cut, but have increasingly questioned its economic merit.
A second key measure -- estimated to cost roughly $44 billion -- is the extension of emergency jobless benefits to help the long-term unemployed. Lawmakers first expanded benefits to cover 99 weeks in 2009, and have since reauthorized the expansion five times.
Republicans are at particularly sharp odds with Democrats over how to pay for the plan. GOP leaders oppose a provision that would fund the measure through a 5.6% surtax on annual incomes over $1 million. Republicans have accused the president of engaging in so-called "class warfare," while Democrats argue wealthier Americans need to share in the cost of fiscal responsibility.

The word Obama won't dare to say

Say what you will about the Republican Party's politics, but one thing I think we all can agree on is that they know how to control the message.
Instead of "educated," they say "elitist."
Instead of "the rich," they prefer "job creators."
And in their latest linguistic sleight of hand, the modern-day Houdinis have managed to turn "stimulus" into a four-letter word.


Or at least a word President Barack Obama no longer feels comfortable saying. In 2009, he couldn't say it enough. Now ... well, I didn't hear it once during his jobs speech last week, even though $447 billion in tax cuts and government spending would certainly qualify as being one.
 Perry: 'Stimulus created zero jobs'


But the president and his administration can avoid whatever word they choose in describing the jobs bill; that's not going to change what Republicans say about it:
"With the president traveling the country touting his Stimulus II plan, it is important to understand the lessons from his first stimulus," Republican National Committee Reince Priebus said.
"I suspect I am not the only American asking, if a trillion dollars' worth of stimulus didn't work, why will another $450 billion do the trick?" former New Mexico Gov. Gary Johnson asked.
"He had $800 billion worth of stimulus in the first round of stimulus. It created zero jobs, $400-plus billion in this package. And I can do the math on that one. Half of zero jobs is going to be zero jobs," said Texas Gov. Rick Perry.


As usual, Republicans are dictating the conversation, this time massaging their response to the president's jobs bill to support their assertion that his $787 billion stimulus package was a failure.
And each day Obama avoids saying the word, he inadvertently gives their claims credibility by appearing to distance himself from his initiative.
Instead of using equivocal language, the president just needs to reclaim the word "stimulus." And he needs to do it now as he tries to sell his jobs bill to the public. After all, it's not like anyone's forgotten the word or the 2009 measure he pushed through Congress. Might as well talk about its successes and shortcomings while trying to help out-of-work Americans, as opposed to being forced to do so in the general election, where such talk will be interpreted as simply trying to help himself.


Besides, the truth is the administration's projections were overly optimistic and failed to meet the president's own mark of keeping the unemployment rate under 8%. Not to mention by its very spending structure, the impact of the stimulus package was not even designed to be felt by the majority of Americans quickly, which may have been wise fiscally but not so politically.
However, even with all of that, for anyone to characterize the stimulus package as a complete failure means he or she either had no idea just how bad the country's economy was or they're just parroting partisan talking points. (Between May 1999 and May 2009, private-sector jobs increased by just 1.1%, the lowest 10-year period since the Depression.)
And I can't help but notice how the chatty Republicans' tongues are tied when it comes to mentioning the 750,000 jobs that were lost on average in the first three months of 2009, during which the stimulus took effect and how that number declined to 35,000 by the beginning of 2010?


And am I the only one who finds it strange that Republican leadership wants to deem the stimulus a failure but fails to mention the studies performed by economists across the political spectrum that credit the stimulus for staving off a depression.
And then there's front-runner Perry calling the president's stimulus package a failure during Monday's debate while not mentioning how he used $6 billion from the first "failed" stimulus package to balance his state's budget. Not sure what they call that in Texas, but in the Midwest we call that hypocrisy.


Maybe I'm just being silly for letting the facts get in the way of a good campaign slogan. Perhaps I'm a bit naive to think the GOP should actually point out the stimulus pros with the cons in hopes of finding a more perfect solution to the country's economic woes.


In any case, it seems Obama's strategy of trying to pass a jobs stimulus package without saying the word "stimulus" just makes talking about the bill more difficult than it has to be. And if he continues to let undecided voters believe the first stimulus package was unsuccessful, what's their motivation for getting behind him and pressuring their representatives to pass the second?
Or even vote for him?