<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xml:base="http://www.newamerica.net" xmlns:dc="
http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
 <title>MSNBC.COM</title>
 <link>http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/85</link>
 <description>The taxonomy view with a depth of 0.</description>
 <language>en</language>
<item>
 <title>MSNBC Interviews Flynt Leverett on the President&#039;s Plan for Iran</title>
 <link>http://www.newamerica.net/pressroom/2007/msnbc_interviews_flynt_leverett_on_the_presidents_plan_for_iran</link>
 <description>&lt;div class=&quot;field field-type-text field-field-body-copy&quot;&gt;
&lt;strong&gt;New America in the News:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;p&gt;[KEITH] OLBERMANN [HOST]: For more on what the president said about Iran particularly in Wednesday`s speech, and what he may have really meant, let us turn now to former CIA and Bush administration National Security Counsel senior official, &lt;strong&gt;Flynt Leverett&lt;/strong&gt;.  Thank you for your time tonight, sir.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;FLYNT LEVERETT, FORMER BUSH NSC OFFICIAL: Thanks for having me.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;OLBERMANN: Are we to conclude from the president`s speech Wednesday evening that the real escalation of this war may not be troop deployment in Iraq, but a wider conflict involving Iran?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;LEVERETT: Certainly the president is laying both the rhetorical conditions and the operational conditions that would enable him in coming months to take military action against Iran, and I think, frankly, those were the most important parts of the speech on Wednesday night.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Rhetorically, he said that Iran is providing material support to attacks on U.S. forces. That is a casus belli. And, of course, he outlined a series of operational steps that really, in many ways, can only, or primarily, be justified or explained with reference to Iran.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;OLBERMANN: There has been much use in the last 48 hours of the term &amp;quot;regional conflict.&amp;quot; There was a senior Pentagon official who told NBC News that the U.S. military has changed its perspective about the war in Iraq, now looking at it as a, quote, &amp;quot;regional conflict with Baghdad as the center of gravity.&amp;quot;&lt;br /&gt;How significant is the terminology in this? This is -- this indicate an actual procedural shift, a policy shift, or just somebody coming up with some new terms?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;LEVERETT: I -- well, it is new terminology. But I think it does have some real significance. The way that the president and his administration have presented what we`re doing in Iraq to the American people and to the rest of the world is that we are helping Iraqis create the conditions necessary for a stable and democratic future.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;What we`re saying now is, rather than our efforts failing, what we`re saying is that it is other actors in the region, primarily Iran, perhaps to a lesser extent Syria, who are keeping that project from succeeding. And so the nature of the project is changing from helping Iraqis make their own future, to stopping these bad actors from contributing to the failure of the American project in Iraq.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;OLBERMANN: For literally years, anybody who`d written that we would wind up someday in Iran -- Sy Hersh comes to mind, or just blogged about it -- was dismissed as an alarmist or something worse. Now, whatever it means, it`s been in a presidential speech. Has a showdown with Iran been part of the plan all along? Or was this something improvised lately as part of some last-chance strategy at the White House?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;LEVERETT: I think it`s somewhere in between. Certainly there are powerful actors in the administration, such as the vice president, who have all along believed that Iran should be a major target in the war on terror, and that we were going to have to take on Iran at some point.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I think the president has been very, very reluctant, resistant, to doing anything by way of serious diplomacy with Iran because he thinks this regime is fundamentally illegitimate. But I think now the fact that his Iraq policy is failing, and the efforts that the U.S. has been pursuing through the Security Council to limit Iran`s nuclear development, those are also, I think, collapsing around them.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;And I think that the president is now finding the idea of military force against Iran more and more attractive, as both his Iraq policy and his Iran policy are failing. And he himself doesn`t want to pursue serious diplomacy with Iran...&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;For the complete transcript, please visit the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.msnbc.msn.com/&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot;&gt;MSNBC&lt;/a&gt; website. &lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/people/flynt_leverett/recent_work_0">Flynt Leverett</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/85">MSNBC.COM</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/25">The Bernard L. Schwartz Fellows Program</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/14">American Strategy Program</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/668">Geopolitics of Energy Initiative</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/7">Foreign Policy</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/issues/keywords/iran">Iran</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/issues/keywords/iraq">Iraq</category>
 <pubDate>Fri, 12 Jan 2007 19:52:00 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Communications</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">4646 at http://www.newamerica.net</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Some CEO&#039;s Get No Respect</title>
 <link>http://www.newamerica.net/publications/articles/2001/some_ceos_get_no_respect</link>
 <description>&lt;div class=&quot;teaser-content&quot;&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This is the Golden Age of the self-made CEO. Michael Bloomberg, an up-from-the-bootstraps media mogul, was just elected mayor of New York City. Jack Welch, the General Electric CEO who trumpeted his working class origins even as climbed to the heights of power and influence, is a best-selling author. The business media loves stories of men and women who worked their way up from the proverbial mailroom to the corner office. Having broken free of the strictures imposed by birth, education, gender and class, they have thrived in the most competitive environments imaginable. They are the ultimate meritocrats.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;For their troubles&amp;hellip; &lt;a href=&quot;/publications/articles/2001/some_ceos_get_no_respect&quot;&gt;more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;!-- /.teaser-content --&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/people/daniel_gross/recent_work">Daniel Gross</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/85">MSNBC.COM</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/25">The Bernard L. Schwartz Fellows Program</category>
 <pubDate>Fri, 09 Nov 2001 00:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Articles</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">2918 at http://www.newamerica.net</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>A Bailout for Everyone</title>
 <link>http://www.newamerica.net/publications/articles/2001/a_bailout_for_everyone</link>
 <description>&lt;div class=&quot;teaser-content&quot;&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Congress and President Bush have taken swift and correct action to pass a $15 billion package of loan guarantees and cash grants for the beleaguered aviation industry. Yet politicians on both sides of the aisle rightly proclaimed that a bailout should not be a means of bailing out highly-paid CEOs from the workings of the market. Labor leaders criticized the bailout for not offering extra funds to help the tens of thousands of workers who may lose jobs and benefits. And the notion of millionaire CEOs keeping their own massive compensation packages intact while slashing thousands of jobs is unseemly.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;But&amp;hellip; &lt;a href=&quot;/publications/articles/2001/a_bailout_for_everyone&quot;&gt;more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;!-- /.teaser-content --&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/people/daniel_gross/recent_work">Daniel Gross</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/85">MSNBC.COM</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/25">The Bernard L. Schwartz Fellows Program</category>
 <pubDate>Mon, 24 Sep 2001 00:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Articles</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">2412 at http://www.newamerica.net</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Curb Your Enthusiasm</title>
 <link>http://www.newamerica.net/publications/articles/2001/curb_your_enthusiasm</link>
 <description>&lt;div class=&quot;teaser-content&quot;&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Earlier this year, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated that the fiscal 2001 surplus, including the Social Security and Medicare trust funds, would come in at a stunning $280 billion. But last week, reacting to the stagnant economy and the newly enacted tax rebates, the CBO sharply revised that figure down to a not-as-impressive $153 billion. This move suggested that the government would have to draw down about $9 billion of the Social Security surplus to fund this year&#039;s operations.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The events have inspired acts of bipartisan hypocrisy. Democrats, whose Congressional forebears for years heedlessly tapped the Social Security surplus to&amp;hellip; &lt;a href=&quot;/publications/articles/2001/curb_your_enthusiasm&quot;&gt;more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;!-- /.teaser-content --&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/people/daniel_gross/recent_work">Daniel Gross</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/85">MSNBC.COM</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/25">The Bernard L. Schwartz Fellows Program</category>
 <pubDate>Fri, 07 Sep 2001 00:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Articles</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">2812 at http://www.newamerica.net</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>A River of Money Dries Up</title>
 <link>http://www.newamerica.net/publications/articles/2001/a_river_of_money_dries_up</link>
 <description>&lt;div class=&quot;teaser-content&quot;&gt;
 &lt;p&gt;As the orgy of media coverage subsides over President Bush&#039;s 
                  first 100 days in office, debate will focus anew on the competing 
                  tax and spending plans. Both Democrats and Republicans are basing 
                  their grand fiscal plans on estimates by the Congressional Budget 
  &amp;hellip; &lt;a href=&quot;/publications/articles/2001/a_river_of_money_dries_up&quot;&gt;more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;!-- /.teaser-content --&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/people/daniel_gross/recent_work">Daniel Gross</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/85">MSNBC.COM</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/25">The Bernard L. Schwartz Fellows Program</category>
 <pubDate>Thu, 26 Apr 2001 00:00:00 -0400</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Articles</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">3328 at http://www.newamerica.net</guid>
</item>
<item>
 <title>Investors Take it in the Shorts for CEOs&#039; Sweetheart Deals</title>
 <link>http://www.newamerica.net/publications/articles/2001/investors_take_it_in_the_shorts_for_ceos_sweetheart_deals</link>
 <description>&lt;div class=&quot;teaser-content&quot;&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Investors in Compaq Computer Corp. have been feeling anything 
                  but bullish of late. The stock of the personal computer giant 
                  has been halved since last summer. Last week, Compaq said it 
                  would cut 5,000 jobs, and miss its estimated first-quarter earnings 
    &amp;hellip; &lt;a href=&quot;/publications/articles/2001/investors_take_it_in_the_shorts_for_ceos_sweetheart_deals&quot;&gt;more&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;!-- /.teaser-content --&gt;
</description>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/people/daniel_gross/recent_work">Daniel Gross</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/85">MSNBC.COM</category>
 <category domain="http://www.newamerica.net/taxonomy/term/25">The Bernard L. Schwartz Fellows Program</category>
 <pubDate>Fri, 23 Mar 2001 00:00:00 -0500</pubDate>
 <dc:creator>Articles</dc:creator>
 <guid isPermaLink="false">3285 at http://www.newamerica.net</guid>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
