The lead article in today’s New York Times, “China Dissident Said to be Hiding at U.S. Embassy,” describes a stranger than fiction story of a blind human rights lawyer who escaped from an extra-legal house arrest, evaded multiple lines of security agents and found haven in the U.S. embassy in Beijing 300 miles away.

The escape and sheltering in the U.S. embassy puts our government’s lip service to human rights on the line because the blind man, Chen Guangcheng, is one of the most famous dissidents in China. He used to work for the Chinese government to help the disabled, but when he disclosed the use of forced abortions and sterilizations to promote their population control policies, he became persona non grata.

He was imprisoned on trumped-up charges then kept in his remote village under house arrest until these recent developments.

This is a chance for Hillary Clinton to earn her salary. She must balance U.S. strategic interests — China has started to cooperate on embargoes of Iran and North Korea regarding nuclear policies — with our deepest values about the dignity of every human being. Her trip to China was scheduled for next week before all this happened, and she has already postponed a scheduled briefing on the trip. We will soon see how she handles the situation and the results she gets. If this all works out, she could be the favorite for the Presidency in 2016.

The lead article in today’s New York Times, “U.S. is Escalating Inquiry Studying Google’s Power,” in my opinion, wrongly suggests a hidden agenda in Google’s search results. Of course, Google is continually tweaking its search algorithm, but that is always focused on combating others’ attempts to game the results.

To think that Google would so blatantly defy its own corporate culture and attempts to optimize results for consumers is hard to believe.

Yet the government escalated its investigation when it hired Beth Wilkinson yesterday, a top attorney who previously played a lead role in the conviction of Timothy McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing. She has brought 40 cases in government and private practice and won them all.

Still, anti-trust cases are notoriously difficult to prove, and even though Google controls 66 percent of the search engine market, showing malevolent intent is a difficult case to make.

The last major online monopoly case was brought 14 years ago versus Microsoft, and one would think that this one will end in some kind of a settlement. However, that part of the process is a long way away as both sides are now just assessing the situation. And one could even argue that at this stage, Google is more powerful, and benevolent, than the federal government.

The lead article in today’s New York Times, “Christie Leaning on Tax Subsidies in Hunt for Jobs,” describes the typical Republican in-bed-with-business approach to the economy. The Governor has misused the Urban Transit Hub Tax Credit Program and been criticized by government reform groups for it. He has handed out subsidies for 10-to-15 years into the future, ostensibly to keep jobs in New Jersey, but in reality providing major subsidies to businesses above and beyond all reason.

The amounts are staggering and work out to more than $300,000 per job retained. Probably the most reprehensible is a deal offered to Prudential for more than $250 million to help the company build an office tower. Meanwhile, Prudential’s previous landlords, also in New Jersey, are up in arms about the situation and have filed suit.

Other organizations benefiting from Governor Christie’s largesse are Panasonic, Campbell Soup and Goya Foods. Campbell actually elminated jobs but still kept some of the subsidy.

Needless to say, Mayor Bloomberg is not too pleased about the situation either. But he has done a better job of saving jobs for New York City than Governor Christie, without any subsidies. New York City has recovered 80 percent of the jobs lost in the recession while New Jersey has only recovered 20 percent.

The lead article in today’s New York Times, “Islamists’ Growing Sway Raises Questions for Libya,” describes an albeit chaotic situation in the newly liberated country, but one that Islamists can readily take advantage of to rise to power.

Unlike some who see Islamic plots everywhere, there are real reasons to fear an Islamic takeover in Libya. The most powerful military leader, Abdel Belhaj, was once believed to be part of Al Qaeda, and Ali Sallabi, an Islamic scholar, is thought to be the most respected person in the nation. Moreover, like Egypt and Tunisia, the Arab Spring in Libya deposed an autocrat who actively suppressed Islamic movements. As a result of moving underground, these movements became highly organized and can now take advantage of that organization to run an effect political campaign.

Many liberals in Libya, therefore, are pushing for more time to organize to catch up with movements such as Etilaf and the Muslim Brotherhood. Meanwhile, Etilaf is issuing decrees or fatwas that sound ominous, such as one prohibiting women from driving.

However, all hope is not lost. It should be noted that the current Prime Minister, Mahmoud Jibril, is an American-educated moderate and so is the Finance and Oil Minister, Ali Tarhouni. Hopefully, they can sheperd all parties to democratic pluralism such as the system in Turkey.

The lead article in today’s New York Times, “Europeans Talk of Sharp Change in Fiscal Affairs,” analyzed some of the weak points of Euro zone countries and how they could be addressed. The Euro has declined significantly as Greece has undergone a sovereign debt crisis, and the lack of central financial institutions has hampered the ability of all Euro-zone countries to assist them.

The problem is the unwieldy nature of the European financial union, and its requirement for unanimous approval by all Euro zone countries before any significant action can occur. The Parliament of any member nation can veto a deal as well.

The article compares the Euro zone legal requirements with the United States’ Articles of Confederation before the Constitution was established. The inability to succeed as a loose grouping of States and the way it was fixed may portend a similar solution by the European Union, creating, in effect, a United States of Europe. Cautious whisperings are already taking place about how to centralize financial authority.

Meanwhile, though, world stock markets continued a significant decline yesterday, with the U.S. markets opening today amid a history of volatility over the past few weeks. Its obvious that a structural fix is needed, but it remains to be seen if the political will exists to accomplish it.

The lead story in today’s New York Times, “Justice Inquiry is Said to Focus on S&P Ratings,” describes a business environment filled with inherent contradictions, conflict of interest and corruption. In addition to an investigation by the Justice Department, the Securities and Exchange Commission is also looking into possible malfeasance by Standards and Poors (S&P), and both inquiries were started before the debt ceiling debacle gained full steam in Washington.

Apparently, it is not unusual for the entitities being rated by S&P to pay in advance for that rating, and this situation causes an obvious conflict of interest. The fees can reach as high as hundreds of thousands of dollars. Of course, the ratings agencies, which includes Moody’s and Fitch as well as S&P, first gained notoriety for their inability to predict the housing market crash that set off the financial crisis in 2008 that we are still recovering from. And, most notably, they all ranked mortgage bonds and the related collateralized debt obligations as possessing a AAA rating.

The recent downgrade of U.S. Treasury bonds by S&P, of course, brings much more prominence to this story. But so does the lack of accountability of any financial organization for the financial crash we all experienced.

The lead article in today’s New York Times, “Debt Bill Signed, Ending Crisis and Fractious Battle,” is somewhat of an anticlimax given the titanic struggles that preceded it. As expected, the Senate passed the debt bill by a substantial margin, 74-26, and the President signed it, raising the debt ceiling a mere 12 hours before it was set to expire.

The new super-commission established by the legislation is commanded to find more than $1 trillion in additional cuts; otherwise, an automatic across-the-board spending cut will take place affecting legislative priorities important for each party: Medicare for the Democrats and Defense for the Republicans. And more vitriolic debate has already broken out about the commission. Republicans say it is not empowered to consider any tax revenue while Senate Leader Harry Reid vociferously contradicted that stand.

And amidst all this debate about the debt, the real concern of the American people, the issue that the Republicans ran on in 2010, is jobs. There are several steps the Congress can take to improve the job situation — if they hadn’t broken for summer recess until September 7th. These include trade pacts, an extension of the payroll tax reduction and improvement in the patent process to encourage entrepreneurs.

So when Congress gets back, enough about debt. Let’s finally move on to jobs.

The lead article in today’s New York Times, “House Passes Deal to Raise Debt Cap and Defuse Crisis,” describes the new debt deal compromise and its passage in the House of Representatives by a 269-to-161 vote. Democrats delayed voting, and the bill seemed stuck at 20 votes short with two minutes to go when Representative Gabrielle Giffords, recovered from an assassination attempt, appeared on the floor to vote for it. To thunderous applause, she seemed to “melt away” the rancor of the past weeks and give a renewed sense of hope.

Somehow, some way, our nation has pulled through once again. The institutions founded so many years ago, derided as dysfunctional over the past few weeks, nevertheless delivered. The deal provides for $2.1 trillion in spending cuts, a raise of the debt ceiling through the next election, and the creation of a joint select committee of 12 bipartisan members of the House and Senate, evenly split, to determine further deficit reductions. If the select committee is unable to agree, automatic triggers will cause painful cuts for both parties, to Medicare for the Democrats, and to the security budget for Republicans.

As the saying goes, democracy is the worst form of government, except for every other one. While the public initially might deride the “sausage making,” in the end, the sausage was completed.

This blog will continue on Saturday, July 30th. Thank you for subscribing.

The lead article in today’s New York Times, “Greece Approves Tough Measures on the Economy,” shows a striking contrast between events in the Greek government and the reaction on the street, where sometimes violent protests continue to roil that nation.

The vote, it should be noted, is in conception only — the implementation remains to be approved. And the government of Prime Minister George Papandreou is getting weaker and weaker.

The measures are significant. They contain $1.4 billion in defense cuts and $2.9 billion in healthcare cuts as well as the selling of $72 billion in national assets. In addition, the wages of 800,000 public workers has been slashed by 10 percent.

Despite all these efforts, many economists say that the Greek debt will probably still have to be restructured with investors receiving only a certain percentage of their money. And it’s unclear whether the austerity measures will work or even make the problem worse. Meanwhile, Spain, Portugal and Ireland are waiting in the wings with very weak economies of their own.

Unfortunately, problems with the euro affect us in the United States, too. The world is so interconnected, especially financial networks, that a Greek default could have major global ramifications. And most think that Greece is just buying time with its latest budget, and a reckoning is waiting down the road.