Chinese-Americans throughout the nation have began a petition opposing Richardson’s appointment because of his handling of the case against Taiwanese-American Wen Ho Lee. The petition calls for the President-elect to disregard Richardson from his Cabinet, completely.

Chinese-American Guy Wong writes that the Richardson appointment will cause difficulty in dealing with the Chinese government.

“As you may know, Richardson singlehandedly caused Dr. Wen Ho Lee his job and his reputation, not to mention his freedom. I expect him, if confirmed as the Secretary of Commerce, to have a tough time with the Chinese and China is one of our biggest trading partners.”

Another Chinese-American, George Koo, also comments on Richardson as Secretary of Commerce.

“The last cabinet post he held was as Secretary of Energy under the Clinton Administration and his performance was decidedly dismal.

Instead of courage, he showed cowardice under pressure. Instead of challenging the right wing for outrageous accusations of the Clinton administration, he appeased them by leaking the name of Dr. Wen Ho Lee to the media as the alleged spy for China.

To this day, he stands by his misconduct.”

On the other side of the fence, Mexican-American Stace Medellin writes that Richardson seems to be a “perfect fit.”

“Okay, so Gov. Bill Richardson will become Secretary of Commerce. Notwithstanding my comments earlier this week on the “snub,” I actually do feel Richardson is a good choice for the post, considering his ability to lead New Mexico through a jobs creation phase.

During his campaign, Richardson boasted creating 80,000 jobs, and that New Mexico was 6th in the nation in job growth. Of course, FactCheck.org challenged his number–which they said was 69,000, and the upped it as growth continued. (Those folks can be so annoying).

So, if Obama's plan is to create green jobs, then I see Richardson being part of that equation.”

Medallin ends his post with another possible nomination for Richardson.

“Maybe now, he'll qualify for a Nobel nomination in International Economic Development, or something like that!”

Case in point: China.

Peter Brookes reports for the China Post:

In the last few weeks, the media has been filled with reports of Chinese cyber spies penetrating the computer networks of both presidential campaigns and even the White House, reading unclassified, but clearly privileged, e-mails.

Unfortunately, that’s only the beginning of it.

No surprise that the Chinese would be interested in what’s being said in the White House, even the non-secret stuff. White House staffers have access to plenty of information that would be of interest to the chaps in Zhongnanhai (the Chinese leadership compound)…

China’s hacker army is also targeting American industry for espionage, especially the defense industry, where new weapons systems and top-of-the-line defense technology are at the center of the bull’s eye…

The same is true with the civilian side of private industry. Beijing is pilfering the technology of U.S. and other foreign firms that set up shop on Chinese soil. In fact, some firms resist putting cutting-edge research and development there for exactly that reason.

Since traditional espionage can be tough in a foreign country (recruiting a spy to pinch information can be expensive, difficult and politically risky), the Chinese have turned to cyberspace. This makes it difficult, if not impossible, to determine who’s picked your pocket, providing plausible deniability to the cyber spook. Spies cover their electronic tracks by routing their penetration through any number of surrogate servers around the world, making finger-pointing difficult.

Not surprisingly, the amount of industrial cyber espionage is grossly underreported, as firms fret over acknowledging that their intellectual property — the crown-jewels of their efforts — has been “exfiltrated.”

And then the key point:

In the end, the Chinese aren’t only stealing our industrial and defense secrets, but something more important: Our ability to compete globally.

America’s great strength has been its ability to innovate — to develop new ideas and concepts. Arguably, no country in history has been as ground-breaking in as many fields as Uncle Sam. It’s something we’ve a right to be proud of.

The theft of our intellectual property — by anyone — means we’ll be less able to compete in international markets as well as protect our security interests, including against the likes of a rising China, destined to be a peer competitor.

What China is doing is this: it is stealing America’s knowledge and innovative ideas. It then uses it for itself, causing the U.S. to suffer in a world in which innovation is key to success. The U.S. will have to guard itself against China’s cyber attacks. Companies and the government can pretend publicly that the problem does not exist, but they will need to do something about this major issue behind closed doors; the best minds in the U.S. should work on it - in the end, the U.S. has tremendous knowledge in this respect, with some of the best computerminds more than willing to help out.

As long as the pay is OK.

©2008 PoliGazette. All Rights Reserved.

On the DotEarth blog, Andrew Revkin muses on the significance of Obama's election, writing…

President-elect Barack Obama on Jan. 20 will become the most important leader of a species that has exploded in just six generations from a total population of 1 billion (around 1830) to a point today when teenagers alone number 1 billion, a species that is on a path toward more or less 9 billion people by mid-century. In numbers, think roughly of adding two Chinas on top of the one that exists today. Expectations that he will exert planet-scale leadership are high, as indicated in this letter from Nelson Mandela to the next president.

He is compiling a list of 10 best proposals to send to Obama's transition team. The proposals will be ranked by readers of his blog.

On the China Dialogue blog, reprints a 2007 Obama speech, reflecting on what Obama's presidency would mean for the environment.

What will a Barack Obama presidency mean for the global environment?

In a policy address delivered in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, in October 2007 – shortly after George W Bush hosted a Washington conference on energy security and climate change — Obama set out his plan. It included a strong focus on energy efficiency and the use of a “cap-and-trade” system. Obama also emphasised his commitment to investing in clean technology, saying that new technology from the United States can help countries like China to fight climate change.

“[W]e will share our technology and our innovations with all the nations of the world,” Obama said. “If we can build a clean coal plant in America, China should be able to as well.”

La Marguerite suggests channeling the magic of community organizing seen in the Obama campaign into tackling climate change.

Sarah Palin should not have mocked Barack Obama for being a community organizer. If anything, tonight’s results proved her wrong. Our new President has given new meaning, and strength to the concept of community organizing. And he has shown us what citizens can do, when given the means to organize towards a cause, that’s greater than themselves.

Tonight I am thinking of the thousands of Obama offices, volunteer networks, and fundraising organizations, along with the sophisticated Internet machine, and the organizing methodology, that went into getting Barack Obama elected. As the signs are coming down, the thank you emails go out, and the temporary offices go back to their original owners, I wonder, is that it? Will we go back to business as usual, each in our homes, going about our private lives?

Or will we use the skills learned during the Obama campaign to mount a national community effort, this time to address the threat of climate change? The last time I checked, we had less than ten years to get our act together. Citizens have a crucial role to play on the conservation end. As someone who has tried for the last year and a half, to curtail my consumerist and energy appetites, I can testify on the difficulty of accomplishing such changes at the individual level. Instead, we need to summon the power of community to help each other.

Omar Basawad of the Safari Notes blog says ‘Congratulations America!'

“If there is anyone out there who still doubts that America is a place where all things are possible, who still wonders if the dream of our founders is alive in our time, who still questions the power of our democracy, tonight is your answer.” So, said the next President of the US.

I, we, have no doubt any more about that. And I do, for the first time truly envy Americans for how you can rise and at what you can do. And how lucky and blessed you are, to have such a democratic system and such ideals! Truly, you are a great people. And that is the reason you will continue leading the World militarily, economically and technologically; and you have just proven too, that you are above the rest of the World, morally. And now you have sent such a great statement across the globe, which will cause ripples and shock waves for a long time to come.

Very hopefully, the ripples and shock waves - will be so powerful so as to bring too, the same kind of change that will, one day, allow our children too - to have such a kind of democracy working in our parts of the World; a democracy that is truly: true, enlightened and ideal.

Tracy Stokes in South Africa had tears of joy on hearing the news that Barack Obama is the next president of USA. She wrote…

I sprang out of bed this morning (very out of character for me) and rushed to the living room, grabbed the remote and had that TV on before you could say “election results”. Obama is the new president of the United States, Bush is on the way out. So here I am, miles and miles away from where it’s all happening, at the southern tip of Africa, a South African of European descent, and it moved me to tears. Why? Because from next January, the most powerful man in the world will no longer be a warmonger, bigot, and dare I say it, village idiot, but an intelligent, compassionate man who has brought to Americans the opportunity to join the rest of the world in working towards peace, upholding of human rights, and fighting climate change. So congratulations to the American people in choosing the right man for the job.

On the 350.org blog, Phil considers the signifance of Obama's win particularly regarding climate change.

It's up to us to make sure Senator Obama follows through with the vision of a world we desperately want that is now a little bit more within reach. Sending him to Poland is a needed first step towards rebuilding the world economy and solving climate change, tasks which will no doubt take years, if not decades, to accomplish.
At this historic turning point, it's up to us to shed the yoke of history and move forward by joining with our new leaders and pushing for a bold new solution to these dual crises. The world is counting on us.

On the GreenPeace Making Waves blog, amid thanks, a reminder of the promises Barack Obama made regarding the environment is stated.

Thank you, Barack Obama, for giving all of us new hope for a changed America.
We're non-partisan here at Greenpeace. We don't have any permanent allies or enemies. We support policies, not politicians. We endorse deeds, not words. So even while a lot of us (in our personal capacity as human beings and not Greenpeace employees) are jumping up and down this morning with glee, we want to take a moment to remind you of the promises you made in your election campaign.

It's delivering on these promises, or bettering them, that will be the true mark of your leadership. …

On ‘Its Getting Hot in Here' blog, Teryn Norris writes of reinventing America.

Few moments in history feel this monumental. It’s the feeling of renewed hope and immense possibility.
Barack Obama has once again tapped America’s power of invention. It’s the same power that led us to invent the first modern democracy. To invent the systems and technologies that continue to drive human progress. To constantly reinvent ourselves in the face of insurmountable hardship and division.
Invention is our greatest power — the very heart of the American spirit. It’s what can renew our promise once again and make this century the next American century.

Teryn concludes the post with:

Obama has rekindled the American spirit. Now he must lead this nation to fully reinvent itself and the world — to lead us in what will be the greatest American project.

Let’s get started.

From South Africa, The Urban sprout blog offers kudos to the the American public for electing Barack Obama.

…how often do we ask ourselves what difference the leaders of New Zealand, Denmark, Germany or Iceland, for instance, will make to us all? But you have to give credit where credit is due and kudos to the American public for electing Barack Obama!

But what can we expect from Obama’s environmental direction, and can he be held accountable to his campaign promises?

We end this post with a quote from the Urban sprout blog.

Obama’s administration has 4 years to turn these visionary promises into something tangible, and that's the real challenge - but right now, there's plenty to be optimistic about.

Before they went to bed, however, bloggers across Asia wrote about what they hoped and expected to find out when they wake up.

In Indonesia, Maman wrote that an “anxious feeling” was coming over her. And, despite the polls agreeing with her, she is preparing for a GOP win.

“I am really having a strange feeling about the US Election, it's a strange feeling I can't describe. The poll survey surely go to my favor, OBAMA will win, but I do believe that race will play in the final result. I try to scare myself with the reality IF GOP win this election, it will be a big POUNCH on only to my stomach, but to almost most of the average American.”

In South Korea, Expat Jane, writes that she’s also feeling “nerves and anxiety” but is excited to find out the results.

“I've been so very cool during most of this campaign. At least, when it comes to the discussion of Obama winning because I believe he will. By this time tomorrow, we'll know.”

In the Philippines, Martin Perez, makes one last plea and further addresses why Filipinos should support Obama.

“For a segment of the Philippine population, the possibilities are within their reach. They just don’t look towards government for this. Middle class Filipinos make do and succeed inspite of the failings of their government. That there are jobs waiting for us abroad is part of our modern paradigm. That we aspire for reliably wealth generating jobs such as medicine, law and accounting, is part of our national intuition. And that we need nothing from government because it takes from us more than we receive is by and large remains the cancer in our society that Dr. Jose Rizal died not having incised.

For the people who have chosen not to have a stake in government despite being able to do so, what they seek is not merely a government that works, but a government they can trust. They need a reason to believe that it can be a force for good. Their contributions — whether time, money, effort or even prayer — should address specific needs, real goals, and achieve tangible results. How we activate and inspire these people is an open question.

It is a question to which Barack Obama has responded excellently.”

Perez further addresses Obama’s campaign.

“Through his campaign, Barack has demonstrated an ability to build a coalition from the ground up. Through his multi-faceted, multi-tiered campaign, he has gotten many people involved and interested in politics, whether they be first-timers or like-the-first-timers. His organization provides a wonderful case study in how media (now with no line between traditional and new) can be effectively utilized to promote a political brand and message. Moreover, his fundraising and rallying capabalities are testaments to not just the efficiency of their campaign machine but to his character. Barack has a quality, an appeal that demands respect, if not that then at least our attention. Most importantly, the message he carries is one I have long wanted to articulate.

What I wish to take out of watching the US elections is a sense of the audacity of hope. Through my study and comparison of various systems, I realize that empowerment comes from that core belief we all share regardless of our status in life — that our hard work will pay off and that tomorrow will be a better day. In Barack I see someone who has been able to inject new energy into the system by reminding people of this fundamental hope. And thus for a Filipino observer such as I, there is simply too much to learn from Barack Obama.

I am under no delusion. Barack Obama is not running for the presidency of the Philippines. But chances are, that in not too many years from now, one of us who have lived through this election cycle will.”

Lastly, in China, Stan Abrams also writes that he is anticipating the results.

“Tomorrow morning at 8:00 I will be sitting in a room at the Renaissance hotel watching CNN, pouring cups of coffee down my throat and trying not to let my blood pressure get too high. (I refer to the AmCham election-watch event — see more info here.)

As I’ve mentioned a few times recently, I have spent a huge amount of time following the election this year. Needless to say, the suspense is killing me, and I really need this to be over so I can move on with my life.”

The expat in China goes on further to state he is “tired” of being embarrassed by the U.S. government.

“It should come as no surprise that I’m tired of explaining to people why Bush was elected/re-elected. I’m tired of having to agree with critics of the U.S. government, tired of being embarrassed by Bush’s latest blunder, tired of saying that this is all temporary (much more difficult after 2004). Bush, McCain and Palin bashing has been a great source of fun and entertainment over the years, of course, but yeah, I am ready for it to be over. Obama’s consistent talk about restoring the image of the U.S. in the world is probably the single most important issue for the average expat, and I dare say that he’s got the expat vote locked up solidly.”

“China’s agreement to help Pakistan build two nuclear power plants is prompting warnings that the new US-India civilian nuclear deal is already pushing other countries to pursue their own nuclear relationships,” he goes on to write.

“The concern among South Asia experts and nonproliferation advocates is that the American deal allowing India to pursue an expanded civilian nuclear program with limited safeguards is prompting other countries in a volatile region to seek a similar deal – something the US had said would not happen.”

Michael Krepon, a South Asia nuclear proliferation expert at the Henry L. Stimson Center in Washington told Lafranchi: “You can’t help but hear about China supplying Pakistan with nuclear power plants and see it as a reaction to the US-India deal. Pakistan is desperate for energy, as is India, but there are lower-cost and shorter-timeline options for producing it, so there is something else going on here and in the Middle East.”

When the United States announced it would work with China on nuclear energy, for the first time in history thereby recognizing and accepting India as a nuclear power, many Middle East and South Asia experts said the deal could very well trigger an angry response from Pakistan, which would look at America’s enemies in order to secure a similar deal. 

For Pakistan, its recent deal with China makes more than sense. It was the only logical policy for the Pakistanis to pursue. 

The bad news for the U.S. is, however, that other countries in the region are like to follow suit. When the U.S. does not allow you to produce nuclear energy, but another major power does, China, you turn to the Chinese for help. Especially if you know that the U.S. is unwilling to stop you when China is on your side and when you see that the U.S. is supporting and encouraging your enemies in the region. 

In the end, Pakistan and India remain archenemies. The U.S. should keep that in mind whenever it deals with either country.

©2008 PoliGazette. All Rights Reserved.

Wang Dao (I believe that’s the professor’s name) in the Hong Kong paper, Ta Kung Pao , according to Michael Turton’s translation, argues that Atooth for a tooth is the way to answer U.S. arms sales to Taiwan .

The United States has decided to sell $6.5 billion worth of advanced weapons to Taiwan. China’s first reaction was to offer a strong verbal response while reserving the right to respond further. It looks like it is time for China and the United States to bring an end to this long-running matter. Now is the best time for China to take a tougher approach toward resolving the issue. Since its establishment of diplomatic relations with China, the United States has not stopped selling weapons to Taiwan. This in and of itself is a violation of the three official diplomatic documents signed by China and the United States when they established diplomatic relations. For this reason, it is also a violation of international law. Some people in the United States invoke the country’s adoption of the Taiwan Relations Act as an excuse to continue selling weapons to Taiwan in an effort to obstruct the mainland’s reunification with Taiwan by force. This practice of using domestic law to resist international law is impermissible in the international community. Wouldn’t the world be thrown into turmoil if China (or some other country) were to sell weapons to a region in a certain country through the adoption of a law governing relations with that country in an effort to obstruct the latter’s reunification? The United States assumes the pose of an “international gendarme,” meddles in other ! count ries’ affairs without regard to the principles of international law and justice, and has committed so many misdeeds that they cannot be listed one by one. The most notorious offense is its invasion of Iraq after circumventing the United Nations.

We Should Not “Repay Ingratitude With Kindness” Despite its violations of the law, the United States does not allow other sovereign countries to sell weapons lawfully. The reasons are none other than its concerns that 1) they will compete with it for business; 2) they will encroach upon its regional interests (which is euphemistically described as “affecting the balance of regional military power”); and 3) they will jeopardize its security. The United States is the world’s largest military power! and arms-producing and exporting country. It accounts for more than half of the global arms market. Even as it makes a fortune out of war-related business, it does not allow other countries to conduct normal arms transactions. This is a case of “giving officials complete license to commit arson while forbidding ordinary citizens to even light their lamps.” As the United States insists upon selling weapons to Taiwan, China should stop “repaying ingratitude with kindness” and showing too much forbearance. It should respond appropriately and adopt a tit-for-tat and measure-for-measure approach rather than merely continue with such “vague and fuzzy” work as lodging verbal protests and cancelling some military exchanges. At a minimum, it may adopt the following measures…

The author advocates seven measures, ranging from the silent treatment to various forms of diplomatic hijinks to exacerbating the financial crisis in the US. My favorite is the emotive, yet vague “seeking selfish gain” response.

Seize the current opportunity to stir up trouble, exacerbate the crisis in the United States, and slow down the pace of recovery in the United States. China can move faster to overtake the United States as a powerful country in the world only if the world’s sole superpower is brought down.

The kernel of the problem is, that the good professor is often right. But, both the US and PRC have always compromised their respective interests to maintain stability and peace. Obviously, the learned blowhard, as much as he might represent official opinion in any way, threatens more than he quotes policy. Yet, in the throes of this crisis, I just have to ask, at what point is stability and peace too onerous a burden for Beijing to shoulder while the US and EU reform their financial and housing markets? At what point, if ever, do the fire-eaters make sense?

Powered by ScribeFire .

©2008 PoliGazette . All Rights Reserved.

India’s refusal to sign the NPT was based on principle, for the NPT is the last vestige of apartheid in the international system, granting as it does to five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council the right to be nuclear weapons states while denying the same right to others. A long-time advocate of global nuclear disarmament, India’s moral stand on the NPT enjoys near-unanimous backing within the country. Its weapons program is also widely (though far from universally) supported at home as a security imperative in a dangerous neighborhood.

Unlike Iran and North Korea, which signed the NPT and then violated its provisions through clandestine nuclear weapons programs, India has openly pursued its own nuclear development, and it has a stellar record on non-proliferation, never exporting its technology or leaking a nuclear secret. Moreover, its nuclear program is under strict civilian control.

Don’t talk about Hindu nationalism (a fault on both commentators). Don’t mention India’s record as both a non-aligned leader under Jawaharlal Nehru, followed by Indira Gandhi’s Soviet flirtations. And, for the love of peace, don’t mention the wars with PRC! Finally, I though Japan was America’s strategic partner in Asia.

Why is it, that when the US, the leader of the nuclear apartheid system in Tharoor’s estimation, argues it can use nukes prudently, that’s cant? But, when India (Tharoor) tries it, why isn’t that a parody, instead of a talking point?

If nukes can’t improve American moral authority, or Israel’s, then New Delhi hasn’t just become the new nuclear Buddha. It’s amazing what lobbyists’ cash will do for college-educated men!

Powered by ScribeFire .

©2008 PoliGazette . All Rights Reserved.

Current TV's Collective Journalism program has started a series of video reports on how the rest of the world views the US. In The View from Over There, people from many different countries state their views on foreign policy, the war in Iraq, the situation with Iran and mention who they would want as the future president of the USA. The video interviews are sometimes in different languages, but all of it is subtitled in English.

This video also uses footage from other shows on the US Elections 2008, but this time concentrating on the foreign perspective. This is something Global Voices and Reuters have been doing for a while now at Voices Without Votes, gathering opinions from all over the planet on the US elections. If you have any posts you would like to submit to the site, you can do it here.

Current TV's next Collective Journalism assignment will be a worldwide view on the US immigration policies.

Who's mistake?

Back in mid August, Lew Mon-hung (劉夢熊）, a representative of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference wrote in several mainstream newspapers in Hong Kong to criticize such investment decision. His opinion has been censored by mainland Chinese mainstream media but distributed widely on the internet. Chenjian is among one of the mainland bloggers distributing Lew's viewpoint:

筆者謹以全國政協委員和金融界人士身份質問中央財金當局有關拍板人：你們這班敗家子哪裏來這麽大的膽子拿國家人民的錢，來買天文數字的「兩房」股票！現在「兩房」基本上已破產，你們如何向全國人民交代？
　　
　　一個國家的外匯儲備，並非這個國家的淨資產，當外資熱錢流走之時，外匯儲備就會下降。所以外匯儲備公認的投資原則是安全第一，分散爲宜。由此觀之，中國財金當局將外儲的百分之二十以上浪擲於美國「兩房」,是極其嚴重的錯誤

中國光是 向「兩房」已投下相當於海内外給四川地震捐款一百多倍的外儲，如此側重美元資產，依據何在？眼光何在？如此離譜決策有沒有黑幕，人大常委會應立即組織特別 調查組應予徹查，追究責任！

Conspiracy theory

Another article consisted of conspiracy theory has also been circulated in forums and blogs, One World One Dream reposts the article in full.

中国经济学家都在干什么，受那些所谓主流经济学家提出的高论影响而实行的政策，最后使谁最终受益，使谁陷入深深窘境了呢？那些“主张对内狂引境外战略投资者、让其大赚贱卖的银行原始股；对外大力推出中国优质大型企业或国有垄断企业境外上市，向海外慷慨派送十倍于融资的分红” 的经济专家到底在干什么，他们的底细和真实身份到底是谁？

The writer urges netizens to re-post this article in official websites in order to warn the leader against such financial decision.

ASM is also on the side the conspiracy theory and maps out the steps on how US government seized away fortune from the rest of the World (zh).

China becomes a loser

Shi Hanbin （時寒冰）, a local finance expert was interviewed by CCTV on the impact of US financial crisis on China in Sep 22. He further elaborates his viewpoint in his blog:

三个方面的影响。其一，次债危机导致美、欧消费需求下降，将降低中国产品的出口。无论是高附加值产品还是低附加值产品，出口的下降趋势都难以避免，当务之急是鼓励内需。其二，次债危机发生后，美元将继续贬值，目前的大宗商品都是以美元计价的，美元贬值意味着大宗商品价格上涨。同时，大批热钱在美元贬值或有贬值预期的影响下，会热炒大宗商品，推高石油、铁矿石等大宗商品价格，增加中国原材料的进口成本。其三，会对中国的资本市场和金融业带来影响，我国金融机构的损失会继续增加。同时，大批盘踞在中国楼市的热钱，会撤离。因此，绝不可以出台政策救楼市，救楼市的结果只能是让热钱高位逃跑，将对中国经济带来毁灭性打击。

Shi Hanbin also questions how the investment decision was made:

这些决策是怎么出台的？为什么许多决策对中国不利对外国反而是有利的。决策的不透明使人民丧失了基本的知情权和监督权，使得一些可怕的暗箱操作大行其道。

在次债危机中，中国的损失极其惨烈，因此，即使有机会，中国也只能眼睁睁地看着它流走，因为，我们的巨额资金被套或打水漂，我们已经不再是能够找寻并抓住机会的人，而是一个巨大的可怜虫！——在把数千亿美元的财富败了之后，最多也只能做个遭人唾弃的可怜虫了！

Zhanghui noticed that after the first outbreak of subprime crisis in Europe back in Aug 2007, Chinese banks haven't reduced their investment in asset backed securities, on the other hand, there is a net increase of US59 billions between Aug 07 and May 08. Now, European countries can say no to the US 700 billion “bailout” proposal, but China cannot.

作为美国的机构债最大的持有人，中国现在不可能清空手中的债券，因为大幅抛售必然造成价格大跌，同时也没有人接盘，更会被美国人认为落井下石，损人不利己。中美两国其实在金融危机中的利益是一致的。某种意义上说，中国政府的支持是美国政府必须的，比西方七国更重要。

Even though the China and U.S governments share same interest in the crisis, many netizens feel it is a painful lesson for Chinese. Here is another widely circulated opinion post quoted from Hong Kong newspapers (via dmxianfeng):

勤劳勇敢的中国人，固守千年古训，省吃俭用，多生产、少进口，多积累、少消费，多攒美元、少花美元，结果到头来却要为美国的金融危机埋单。而且，一边谦和地堆起笑脸纳贡，一边还要承受对方的傲慢和谩骂！这就是中国今天所面对的世界经济体系：谁执掌了金融的牛耳，谁就执掌了世界。这悲壮的一课，将给国人留下刻骨铭心的记忆。

There are votes and comments at china daily bbs on: Should US Congress pass the $700b bailout plan? Although it might not reflect popular opinion, can still take a look.

‘In a single transaction on Dec. 10, Rep. Spencer Bachus of Alabama made up to $15,000 off an investment he had held for just two weeks, according to his congressional financial disclosure statement. He sold on the same day that the company, Focus Media Holding Ltd., got a market bounce off its announcement that it would acquire a competitor.’

©2008 PoliGazette. All Rights Reserved.

©2008 PoliGazette. All Rights Reserved.

Tim Johnson, a current resident of Beijing, recently posted both Republican candidate John McCain’s and Democratic Barack Obama’s plan for improving relations with China on China Rises. Chinese bloggers commented on their plans.
Daisann writes there isn’t a difference between the two plans.

“The differences in the two candidate's positions are so slight they're almost indistinguishable. Or is there some nuance that I'm missing?
Actually, the fact that two candidates who have such different positions on nearly everything come to something resembling agreement when it comes to China speaks volumes–if U.S. policy makers and “experts” had a deeper understanding of China and things Chinese, maybe these positions would move beyond boilerplate.”

Another commentator, who is American, writes why Obama’s plan has forced him to vote for McCain.

“Despite Bush being a bad president and all, China liked him because of Bush's mostly Laissez-faire policy toward China compared to other presidents. Obama's tone of how he can ‘change' China is what China doesn't like. That's why I'm a democrat voting for McCain.”

An American living in Beijing, Stan Abrams, writes in China Hearsay, that American media outlets are oversimplifying the Chinese view on the elections and the U.S. He then adds that the candidates don’t care much about China.

“Let’s face it. Neither of these guys is trying too hard for the China vote, and I doubt that Sarah Palin could find China on a map.”

Chinese American author Irwin Tang compares Chinese-American relations to Russia, in a recent Asian Week post.

“With each pronouncement, China seems more and more like Cold War Russia…even as Russia seems more and more like Cold War Russia.

Of course, it is largely about race.

When China kept a downed U.S. spy plane for days before returning it to the United States, right-wing radio called for boycotting Chinese American restaurants, some even suggesting that internment of Chinese Americans might be advisable.
In Russia’s current war, it has invaded Georgia, killed thousands of people, and seized U.S. Army Humvees. Yet, no media here talk about boycotting Russian American businesses or throwing Russian Americans in internment camps.
Hanging over China’s Bird’s Nest stadium is the shadow of a burgeoning economic superpower. Some Americans believe that China is the main cause of U.S. unemployment. According to this logic, though, America is held hostage by China, who owns a substantial portion of America’s foreign debt.
China might end up owning America.”

While commentator on this post, Huang Fong, writes that people are simply scared of what is unfamiliar and with communication, relations can be improved.

“I think people in general just fears the unknown. If Chinese people continue to be secretive and closed, people tend to fear for the worst. Every Chinese have the obligation to open up and be friendly and spread the truth about being Chinese. Being in America, we know so much about Westerners, the kind, the cruel, and the ugly. The people in China, thinks that Americans are warmongers. From an outside perspective and from recent events, we can’t blame them. However, the Chinese people always seem to have a good feeling about American people who travel to China. Once communications begin, the fear will subside.”

Finally, A Chinese blogger now living in New York is simply confused with the morals of each presidential candidate and writes in her blog, that they are all, essentially the same.

“I’ve come to conclusion that the U.S. will end up like China, atheistic, market-oriented, corrupted, cheap, Olympics-crazy, with a pseudo-government who fly to New Orleans every now and then when there’s a hurricane just to show the country is still ok when it’s..not really.”