>>Sorry for going off into the wider ranging thoughts about the Afghan strategy debate, which is ongoing. My original point remains that whether President Obama was in Washington or Copenhagen yesterday is a complete non-impact non-issue.
>>
>>GRATUITOUS PARTISAN REMARKS START BELOW ---
>>
>>I think you know I dislike reflexive political responses but here's a mention only in passing that his predecessor spent over 1/3 of his time in office at Camp David or in Crawford.
>>
>>For which, I hasten to add, I am grateful ;-)
>
>Commentary over here is that he would have got attacked in the US fox media either way (if he had or hadn't gone) and its indicative of how polarised things are there. You'd think from the tone of some coverage that he was half way through a second term. There was also some interesting pieces about how much the health industry there has spent lobbying against reform. No wonder your bills are so high.f
>
>BTW I think the main factor in the Rio choice must have been that South America has never hosted the Olympics. FIFA has a policy of rotating the World Cup around the different regions maybe the Olympics are doing the same..

I agree with that, and in fact applaud it. This is terrific for Brazil and South America. Beach volleyball will never be the same ;-)

The polarisation (sp? lol) drives me nuts. One of the reasons I was so enthusiastic about Barack Obama was he seemed to offer a way forward from the culture wars that have dogged us. The early returns are not good. Despite his own missteps, he has to fight the issues with one hand and the permanently antagonistic with the other. So much wasted energy.