My First Day

On Day One is a neat initiative where they ask people to outline what they would advice the next president to do on day one of their administration. I recorded one last week and said we should recommit to nuclear disarmament and the multi-lateral non-proliferation process:

Of course in reality the savvy president will spend day one thinking about the decorating and putting outlandish demands on the White House chef. There are plenty of days left after that to worry about things like nuclear proliferation.

Comments

T-shirt and blazer - our Matt is a style maven.

Posted by Andy | May 7, 2008 10:28 AM

Isn't day one almost entirely planned by the time it comes around?

6am Intelligence Briefing
7am Phone calls with major heads of state
8am Metting with Joint Chiefs of Staff to discuss Iraq
10am sign executive orders to lift "global gag rule", lift ban on funding of stem cell research
11:30 Phone call with Iraq's elected leaders
12 bipartisan lunch with Congressional leadership
1:30pm Press Conference
3pm ... okay, now I'm out of things that are clearly planned.

Posted by Nicholas Beaudrot | May 7, 2008 10:37 AM

On Day One is a neat initiative where they ask people to outline what they would advice the next president to do on day one of their administration.

I would advice the President to hire a proofreader. First. Before anything. Even before breakfast and beating the chained, captive Republican with the Presidential Nurf Bat.

Posted by Jemand von Niemand | May 7, 2008 10:38 AM

Close Guantanamo!

Posted by Curtis | May 7, 2008 10:40 AM

I think there are numerous rifts to heal with other nations. So much today is global in nature, from economics, the enviroment and energy to military affairs and battles with diseases. We need the goodwill and cooperation of these nations to prosper. Bush and many of those in his employ committed atrocious criminal acts during their tenure. Until justice is served these victimized nations and those looking upon their suffering can't be expected to join us in a progressive agenda. On day one a new Democratic president should announce he is instructing the Justice Department to commence criminal investigations of Bush and others, hopefully leading to his eventual arrest, incarceration and possible execution for war crimes. Once the world sees we're just as serious about dealing with our own murderous sociopaths as we are with those beyond our borders we'll regain a measure of respect.

Posted by steve duncan | May 7, 2008 10:41 AM

Pack Dick Cheney's ass off to Gitmo?

What other names should we add to Caesar's Proscription?

Posted by Don Williams | May 7, 2008 10:42 AM

I agree that the short term consequences of committing to nuclear disarmament, which you discuss, are both desirable and plausible outcomes. The problem I have is that I'm not sure if the long term goal is actually desirable.

I've always thought that the best of all worlds is to have nuclear weapons limited to a small number of countries as a deterrent against any country making rapidly building up a stockpile and holding the world hostage with it. I agree that this doesn't seem "fair" to the non-nuclear states, and that this lack of fairness can hinder their cooperation. But, what about the need for deterrence?

Posted by Jim W | May 7, 2008 10:42 AM

Lazer armed robots

Posted by MS | May 7, 2008 10:57 AM

"Of course in reality the savvy president will spend day one thinking about the decorating and putting outlandish demands on the White House chef."

Is Imelda Marcos available? Seriously, if you don't eat yourself sick the first day by eating some weird food combination you're always wanted to try that would make Tom Caliccio beat your ass, then you've failed.

Posted by Reality Man | May 7, 2008 11:12 AM

I've always thought that the best of all worlds is to have nuclear weapons limited to a small number of countries as a deterrent against any country making rapidly building up a stockpile and holding the world hostage with it. I agree that this doesn't seem "fair" to the non-nuclear states, and that this lack of fairness can hinder their cooperation. But, what about the need for deterrence?

I always thought the best of all worlds was for the US to secretly have nukes while no one else did.

Posted by right | May 7, 2008 11:14 AM

3pm ... okay, now I'm out of things that are clearly planned.

4PM
Preliminary discussion of indictments of former Bush administration officials for torture/wiretapping, etc?

Posted by Christopher Colaninno | May 7, 2008 11:16 AM

More seriously I think Matt is absolutely correct to say that nuclear disarmament and pursuing the multi-lateral non-proliferation process should be the first priority of the next administration.

Posted by Christopher Colaninno | May 7, 2008 11:22 AM

If you think the Chinese, India, Russia, Israel, and Pakistan will give up their nukes you truly are a naive, egg-head weenie.

And I don't think unilateral nuclear disarmement will fly with the American public. Just guessing, but I don't think most of us are prepared to commit suicide yet.

Posted by Midwest Yahoo | May 7, 2008 11:32 AM

how about ordering a pullout of Iraq?

Posted by phil | May 7, 2008 11:38 AM

3 PM: Take Air Force One out for a spin. See if they'll let you drive it for a second.

4 PM: Ask to see "the button." Pretend to trip and fall on it with your outstretched hand. Ha ha!

5 PM: Call the leader of Kazakhstan and do your Borat impression for him.

6 PM: Pizza!

Posted by hum | May 7, 2008 11:41 AM

how about ordering a pullout of Iraq?

Posted by phil | May 7, 2008 11:42 AM

Item 1: Order "O" keys for White House computers
Item 2: Order zero key for Oval Office computer

Posted by ao | May 7, 2008 12:11 PM

midwest yahoo writes: "If you think [other countries] will give up their nukes you truly are a naive, egg-head weenie."

why are you calling ronald reagan a naive, egg-head weenie. he really wanted to see a nuke free world. [hard to believe, but true.]

Posted by dj spellchecka | May 7, 2008 12:39 PM

I realize that the fact that he's a useful idiot is one of the main reasons MattY has this blog, but even useful idiots can get so idiotic they become less useful. Isn't the group sponsoring this basically just globalist scum? What's their goal? (ondayone.org/about)

MattY gets a shout out here:
ondayone.org/node/1383

However, this idea isn't so bad:
ondayone.org/node/661

Announce plans for a food garden on the White House lawn, making one of the White House's eight gardeners responsible for it, with part of produce going to the White House kitchen and the rest to a local food pantry.

Posted by TLB | May 7, 2008 12:43 PM

why are you calling ronald reagan a naive, egg-head weenie. he really wanted to see a nuke free world. [hard to believe, but true.]

>>>>>
I ***want*** to see peace and love between all people, an end to world hunger, a cure for AIDs, and Scarlett Johansen naked in my bed. Sure, let's through in nuclear disarmament too.

I just don't expect to see these things.
>>>>>

Posted by Midwest Yahoo | May 7, 2008 12:53 PM

I would recommend reading a background brief: the US Army's "Procedure for Military Executions".

1) Includes "Drop Tables" telling you how much rope to measure out based on prisoner's body weight. You wouldn't, for example, want a 12 foot drop with a fat ass like , for example, Rush Limbaugh. With a fat guy, a 12 foot drop Pops the head clean off --which leaves a messy appearance inconsistent with government decorum.

2) Manual Tells you how to build permanent scaffords --as well as how to select ..er..improvised ones.

3)In the event you want to dispatch prisoners with "musketry", the manual tells you how to do that as well --including the finishing touches to the ceremony:

"g. The escort, with the band playing a lively air, will return to their parade ground and be dismissed."

5) The Army even makes provision for poor markmanship with 12 rifles at 15 paces:

"d. The officer charged with the execution will join the medical officer who will examine the prisoner and, if necessary, direct that
the "coup de grace" be administered. Should the medical officer SO decide, the sergeant of the execution party will administer the "coup de grace," with a hand weapon, holding the muzzle just above the ear and one foot from the skull."

6) In a display of old-fashioned gallentry, it even tells you to check with high command if you discover a female prisoner (to be executed) is
pregnant. ( Nowadays,however, I imagine the instruction would be "We don't want to know. ")

See http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/pdf/procedure_dec-1947.pdf

Posted by Don Williams | May 7, 2008 1:06 PM

Fun, dorky ideas to start to Day 2:

1 AM: Raid White House liquor cabinet with Ted Kennedy. Make sure he gives his car keys first to the Secret Service.

2 AM (while drunk): Find out if McCain's daughter's blog (the one with the logo of her silhouette in red fuck me pumps) is still up and make sarcastic, subtly sexual comments.

3 AM: Wake up Reid to appoint Angelina Jolie ambassador Nigeria and Salma Hayek ambassador to Delaware. When Reid gets confused and say this makes no sense, take a drunken swing and miss.

4 AM: Make Sarkozy appoint Laetia Casta ambassador to the US.

5 AM: Call up Seth MacFarlane and offer him the job of Press Secretary, but only if he does it in his Stewie voice.

6 AM: Discover Michael Moore sleeping under Oval Office desk with a camera. Wonder how long he's been there but then forget after another swig of Jose Cuervo.

7 AM: Wiretap Vitter's phone. Release his phone sex tapes with Larry Craig to Jon Stewart for shits and giggles.

8 AM: Tell Greenspan you're appointing him to a commission and needs to come to DC right away. When he arrives the next day, act confused and tell him to go away.

9 AM - 10 PM: Nap. Make sure to burn the sheets to get rid of the scent of Bush's tears first.

Posted by Reality Man | May 7, 2008 2:36 PM

"deterrent against any country making rapidly building up a stockpile and holding the world hostage with it."

If you have any kind of intelligence operation, this is not possible - especially against the US who already has all the nuke knowledge there is.

This is the one scenario where one might argue for Matt's belief that military intervention is appropriate for non-proliferation - but because of the point I just made, it really isn't.

Nukes aren't magic. They need development time, they need storage, and they don't eliminate the power of conventional militaries. They'd good for deterrence and that's about it.

"If you think the Chinese, India, Russia, Israel, and Pakistan will give up their nukes you truly are a naive, egg-head weenie."

Actually China would have every reason - namely several million men in their army which they can't use even regionally against the US because of US nukes - to give up their nukes if everybody else did. Ditto India.

Russia, less so, but still possible. Russia is relatively big and doesn't fear invasion much these days compared to the WWII days.

Pakistan might give up nukes if India did, but probably not given their military disparity. No real solution there.

Israel will never give up nukes and will have to be forcibly disarmed since without nukes they can't dominate the Middle East.

A good long economic embargo by the rest of the world would solve that problem since Israel's economy would evaporate and they would be poorer than the Palestinians. If you can't afford the upkeep, might as well get rid of them, especially once your own citizens starts demanding it.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | May 7, 2008 3:51 PM

The first thing I would do would be to fuck a guy named Hampton Stephens.

Posted by Luke | May 7, 2008 3:57 PM

arrest Bush and Cheney as enemy combatants.

Refuse to release them until Congress rescinds the legislations giving the President the power to do it.

Posted by spencer | May 7, 2008 5:08 PM

Curtis got it right. Of course all the briefing things are important. But the public and the world is expecting an immediate change of direction from the US. This means you need something symbolic which is easy to pass very quickly.

We just had a change in government in Australia recently, and in the first week the PM took 4 cabinet ministers to Bali to hand the UN SG our documents formally ratifying the Kyoto Protocol. On the first day of parliament, first order of business was apologising to our Indigenous people for our treatment of them in the past. Second order of business was repealing workplace legislation which was considered very "anti worker".

Obama should, on day 1, sign documents which re-instate habeas corpus. He should then request congress to ratify the Kyoto Protocol.

After the rest of his briefings, that'd probably be enough for the first day.

Posted by Domino | May 8, 2008 2:53 AM

if matt's the prez then first order of biz should be free comics and ponies for everybody.

being serious here, i would think that apologising to our Indigenous people for our treatment of them in the past would also be a nice thing to do.

Posted by dj spellchecka | May 8, 2008 10:43 AM