Archive for the 'American Politics' Category

24
Mar

The Fall of America? It’s all about the Debt…

Mark Steyn continues to be a fantastic inspiration for impromptu posts with his thoughts on the loss of liberty and the eventual decline of the American empire:

What happens when the policies that brought ruin to Detroit and sclerosis to California become the basis for the nation at large? Strictly on the numbers, the United States is in the express lane to Declinistan: unsustainable entitlements, the remorseless governmentalization of the economy and individual liberty, and a centralization of power that will cripple a nation of this size. Decline is the way to bet. But what will ensure it is if the American people accept decline as a price worth paying for European social democracy.

The United States now spends more on its military than the next 40 or so nations combined. Yet in two rinky-dink no-account semi-colonial policing campaigns, it doesn’t feel like that, does it? A lot of bucks, but not much of a bang. You can understand why the entire Left and an increasing chunk of the Right would rather vote for a quiet life. But that’s not an option. The first victims of American retreat will be the many corners of the world that have benefited from an unusually benign hegemon. But the consequences of retreat will come home, too. In a more dangerous world, American decline will be steeper, faster, and more devastating than Britain’s — and something far closer to Rome’s.

Steyn makes many good points but from an economic perspective America was slated for decline since the 1980’s when they essentially did a kamikaze strike on the USSR. Amid the celebration of Reagan’s low taxes, very few people paid attention to two critical problems -

  1. Spending was far outstripping revenues, despite the increased number of revenue sources and so-called trickle-down
  2. Alan Greenspan was rapidly devaluing American currency (i.e. lowering interest rates) to keep the value of the debt low and to stimulate economic growth

Ironically, currency devaluation -long hailed by capitalists as a way of stimulating expansion- amounts to a hidden taxation – on income AND pre-existing savings. Since the mid 1980’s it has made more sense for consumers to be in debt than have savings, as the value of those debts has decreased rapidly. George Bush I did nothing about this issue (ie fire Greenspan) and Bill Clinton benefited from circumstance when the dotcom boom led to a temporary American surplus.

U.S. Debt Trends

U.S. Debt Trends (source - Wikipedia)

In the meantime, Japan and China bought American debt (e.g Treasury Bills) at a cracking pace – a trend that accelerated when Bush II decided to invade Iraq and will accelerate even more now that Obama has found health-care for 300 million people instead of 50 million.  With China holding nearly $780 billion dollars of American debt, the United States has relegated itself to toothless observer in the largest economic/military growth spot in the world (East Asia). Not a good economic position given China is the major long-term rival and has shown little regard for playing by the rules of most industrial nations.

The final nail in the coffin will probably be when the military-industrial complex collapses and free market forces dictate that weapons are best bought from countries that can produce them for cheaper. Again this will be China, which has both the expertise and the cheap labour. The main reason we all aren’t speaking Arabic is because the Ottoman/Seljuk/etc paid little attention to weapon-making and ended up having to buy weapons from the same “barbarians” they sought to crush during their attempts to conquer Europe. An empire without the ability to produce its own war in-house is doomed to fall.

Sphere: Related Content

15
Aug

Is Disagreeing with ObamaCare Inherently Racist?

Lots of people disagree with Obama for lots of reasons.  His policies are very European in nature and to the left of most Americans, including within his own party.  Many of his supporters  last election hoped that he would set some of those views aside and govern from the center, and he has in some areas (war, terror).  However, this healthcare bill offended many both in its universal nature and in the way he tried to ram it through congress.

Disagreeing with universal health care or Obama’s shotgun approach to passing it isn’t racist.  Even wanting to preserve your tax dollars as a general principle isn’t racist.  The WAY you choose to protest could be, though.  The REASON you disagree with health care could also be racist.  I believe many of these charges would have still been levied if, say Hillary Clinton was president.  After all, who will disproportionately benefit from universal health care?  Poor Latinos and Blacks.  As soon as some people hear that, they can’t close their wallets fast enough, even if they were willing to shell out a billion a day to bomb poor Arabs and throw a ticker tape parade after every mission.

Sphere: Related Content

08
Jun

Why Would this Fiscal Conservative Support Obama? Toxicity.

Note: While keeping this blog relatively politics-free over the past few months, I’ve been fervently defending Obama at Jack’s Newswatch against all manner of attacks (some particularly underhanded). One of my favorite counter-posters inquired why if I was an Obama-maniac do I appear to be falling back. Airing direct political views isn’t something I like to do too often but it’s worthy clearing the air in this instance. Below is a slight modification of my response:

Actually, I supported Clinton over Obama, stating that Obama would be a wonderful candidate … for 2012.

When McCain came up I supported McCain over Obama because Obama’s economic policies didn’t (and don’t) appeal to me. I am a fiscal conservative in the truest sense – money coming in should surpass money going out, no matter how “righteous” the spending. This applies to both government housing and Middle-Eastern war-mongering. Both Obama and Reagan were/are failures in this respect (a tax cut is simply another form of redistribution and is just as toxic when combined with skyrocketing spending).

However, when McCain introduced Sarah Palin and she brought along her gaggle of toxic rednecks, I turned the corner. So did many people to the right of me. We held our nose and hoped for the best for Obama.

So far it doesn’t look like he’s done anything that Bush hadn’t done or wasn’t en route to doing. No one’s mortgage has been paid off, Acorn has not been given any special mandate to help the poor, etc. That doesn’t bother me, but it should bother his heartfelt believers. I’ll continue to defend Obama against anything that looks like a Blog-lynching, just as blacks who did not believe in MLK’s conciliatory approach to civil rights nonetheless defended him against the KKK and similar groups. But that’s where my support ends. I’d honestly rather have a beer with Bush – he seems less pretentious and more likely to embrace Cynapse’s oddball humor. I didn’t care for “shrub” as a leader, mind you.

Still, to say Obama should fail is equivalent to saying America should fail. That’s pretty toxic talk, and people who campaign for Obama’s downfall even though record deficits hang in the balance are basically saying they’d rather have their nation fail financially than not have their pet projects funded (or worse yet, withhold funding from their neighbors just to “stay ahead”). That’s exceptionally selfish.

Sphere: Related Content

26
May

Movie Review – Manufacturing Dissent

Title: Manufacturing Dissent
Release: 2007
Genre: Documentary
Run Time: 97 Minutes
Publisher: Liberation Entertainment
Rating: 70%

Few filmmakers can claim to have a greater impact on American political culture than Michael Moore. His initial release, Roger & Me, revolutionized the modern documentary by casting the filmmaker as truth-seeking protagonist. Moore’s relentless pursuit of then GM CEO Roger Smith about his company’s decision to move manufacturing jobs to Mexico (and thus decimating the economy of Flint, Michigan) provided the perfect mix of comedy and social commentary. Moore’s quirky yet infectious approach would be further refined in several subsequent documentaries, including Bowling for Columbine and the anti-war Fahrenheit 9/11.

Michael Moore took his role as left-wing agitator to the extreme, creating a cottage industry for counter documentaries that question his political intentions, dishonest editing of footage and truthfulness of his factual claims. Most of these films, among them Fahrenhype 9/11, Celsius 41.11 and Michael Moore Hates America, are also American and decidedly right wing in nature. However one documentary stands alone in the group. It is Canadian both in origin and presentation, created by Debbie Melnyk and Rick Caine (previously known for their work on Citizen Black). While not counter-partisan, their film raised as many or more disturbing questions about the intentions of Michael Moore as its more fervent brethren.

Filmmaker Michael Moore

Manufacturing Dissent is a Michael Moore style documentary, only casting Melnyk as the truth-seeking protagonist and Moore as the evasive object of interest. Along her ill-fated journey, Melnyk interviews a plethora of Moore’s current and former friends. Most are in the former category and portray Moore as an egomaniac not so concerned with finding justice for the little guy as he is with making money and a name for himself. The interviewees pull few punches in their assessment of the award-winning filmmaker:

  • A former writer for the publication Rock n Roll confidential alleges a young publisher Michael Moore used some articles for his own local paper without paying the proper royalties. Moore is also accused of not paying his staff
  • The infamous Mother Jones controversy is covered in moderate detail, with former employees of the magazine describing Moore as a tyrant who demoralized his employees and sanitized the image of the Nicaraguan Sandinistas – a revolutionary group often seen as too extreme even for the American anti-Reagan left.
  • Producers and others involved with Roger & Me allege timeline manipulations, staged events and most startlingly that Michael Moore actually received two interviews with Roger Smith (both ended up on the cutting room floor, so to boost the dramatic effect of GM’s depravity)
  • In stark contradiction to the anti-war sentiment contained the documentary Fahrenheit 911, Moore’s private foundation was discovered to have owned and sold stocks in defense contractors that profited from the Iraq invasion – most notably Honeywell and Halliburton (the latter being publicly associated with none other than George W. Bush’s VP, Dick Cheney)

The intended and well-demonstrated irony in Manufacturing Dissent is that Michael Moore reacts very badly when confronted with Michael Moore style gotcha journalism – much worse than, say, Roger Smith. The unintended irony of the film is that it can be discounted for the same reason as most of Moore’s documentaries. On several occasions, Melnyk swoops in on Moore during public appearances, demanding his undivided attention to tough questions even though other cameras are rolling, before getting silenced by Moore’s omnipresent security. Very seldom do targets put on the spot in this manner answer gracefully and thoughtfully, suggesting that the viewer is not getting both sides of the story.

Michael Moore probed for Roger & Me

More importantly, Melnyk misses the opportunity to explain in detail how Michael Moore actually manufactures dissent. For instance, it’s not enough to chase around the CEO of GM and indirectly present his supposed evasion as a reason to rebel against GM’s decision to move manufacturing jobs to Mexico – the economic incentives for moving jobs to Mexico (despite immediate relocation/retraining costs and reputation risk) must also be explored. What role did American unions and labour costs play? Is Mexico exploiting its own people to secure manufacturing jobs? Is GM merely a symptom of a much larger problem concerning US trade with third world countries? In terms of shaping opinion, it could be argued that ignoring the economic mechanics behind unpopular decisions like relocating GM jobs is just as critical as superimposing distraught civilians over clips of aloof political figures. Unfortunately, Manufacturing Dissent ignores these possibilities in favour of merely trying to make Moore sweat the same way he enjoys making other sweat.

Manufacturing Dissent is vindictive, somewhat disjointed and plays more like a lengthy episode of W5 than a documentary film. Conversely, it excels at probing the intentions of the man behind the Michael Moore myth without coming off as a right wing hit job, occupying that rare space in the documentary spectrum where politicized figures can be dissected without necessarily making a political statement. Given the cultural prominence of Moore’s films and the dogmatic zeal of his supporters, Manufacturing Dissent becomes nearly essential in understanding what drives this polarizing cultural icon.

Sphere: Related Content

17
Mar

Movie Review – The Obama Deception

Title: The Obama Deception
Release: 2009
Genre: Documentary
Run Time: 112 Minutes
Publisher: Alex Jones Productions
Rating: 82%
URL: http://www.obamadeception.net/

The Obama Deception is the latest documentary film from talk-show host anti-Globalist activist Alex Jones. The film opens with dramatic election footage backed by excerpts from various Obama speeches but wastes no time tearing into Obama’s populist image with an opening monologue by rapper and activist KRS-One (aka Kris Parker) that compares the role of president to being shift manager at a Burger King. Parker ends his diatribe by observing that the angry customers (i.e. voters) can complain all day to the manager but never get to see the owners of the restaurant.

The Obama DeceptionParker’s analogy summarizes the film’s premise: Barack Obama, like all U.S. presidents since JFK, is little more than an attractive empty suit who was promoted by the political “elites” to quell public anger over the direction of the Bush administration. The president’s role is largely ceremonial to pacify the masses while the real power is held by international bankers and non-elected bodies like the Federal Reserve and the mysterious Bildeberg Group. These non-elected bodies aim to consolidate their world power by precipitating a crisis (e.g. the recent failure of the banking system tied to sub-prime mortgages) that will coax the people into submitting more of their civil liberties to centralized powers in exchange for (perceived) security.

Jones seeks to prove this thesis by demonstrating a long history of economic imperialism, the way unelected bodies have affected the policies of past U.S. presidents (the JFK conspiracy is discussed, as he was allegedly the last president who truly tried to change the system; his comeuppance is illustrated via the infamous Zapruder assassination film) and most importantly compare the one-time senator Obama’s platform to what has actually been done since he took the white house. Despite President Obama’s term being barely 3 months, Jones provides a rather impressive list of promises already broken by the 44th president of the United States:

  • Instead of repealing the patriot act as pledged, Barrack Obama voted to reinstate it
  • Obama watered down his original pledge to bring all troops home from Iraq in 6 months. Now a only portion of troops will allegedly be brought home in 23 months
  • While signing off the closing of Guantanamo bay, Obama’s mandate still allows for rendition; the administration threatened to cut intelligence ties to the United Kingdom over alleged evidence of American misdeeds
  • Despite being elected on a platform of neutralizing lobbyists, Obama’s cabinet contains some of the most powerful lobbyists in the country. Most notably, treasury secretary Timothy Geithner was a top lobbyist for Goldman Sachs – to date, the leading beneficiary of the so-called stimulus packages ($12.9 billion)

This documentary excels at providing externally verifiable facts and sometimes shocking footage. For instance, most people probably didn’t know that Barrack Obama -model liberal- has ties to staunch Republicans. The film reveals one of Obama’s early endorsers to be none other than Henry Kissinger – the former Secretary of State is shown in a CNBC clip declaring Obama to be the perfect candidate to set a new world order.

Seasoned skeptics will be relieved to hear that The Obama Deception provides a concise description of what they believe to be President Obama’s agenda for the coming years:

  1. Bringing the US financial system under the control of the Bank of the World
  2. Conscription for persons aged 18-24 into a domestic paramilitary force under direct command of the president
  3. Disarmament of Americans through stricter gun control
  4. Strong restrictions on free speech through promotion of the Fairness Doctrine and various hate speech laws
  5. Military control of African resources through Africom (to secure resources and push away China from the continent)
  6. Further integration with Mexico and Canada in preparation for the North American Union
  7. Federal control of family farms through animal ID legislation

The Obama Deception - Movie ReviewPerhaps most shockingly, the film alleges that Obama will in due time fall on his sword and take responsibility for the social upheaval resulting from this agenda. This virtual abdication will pave the way for the next Republican “saviour” who will court the American people as a renegade against socialism, all while perpetuating the agenda dictated by the “elites”.

It’s at this point that The Obama Deception starts to resemble the standard conspiracy theory flick, recently popularized by Zeitgeist and Loose Change (Jones was executive producer for the latter). This perception is only bolstered by the film-maker’s own footage of supported activists picketing and harassing cars entering various political functions they allege to be anti-democratic, playing cat and mouse with event security. The factual portions of the film are not immune to scrutiny either. The Obama Deception backs its core thesis by repeatedly sequencing verifiable information, somewhat alarming (if abbreviated) video clips that could be taken out of context and allusions to sinister activity that seem logical based on the presented information. It’s the classic Yes-Yes strategy of persuasion used by the aforementioned films – a technique that can reach the same level of deception Jones alleges of the president. Alex Jones is no stranger to controversy himself, having spearheaded a movement to rebuild the infamous Branch Davidian compound in Waco Texas that was destroyed by the ATF during its pursuit of cult leader David Koresh. Jones has also produced several conspiratorial films such as Endgame: Blueprint for Global Enslavement and 911: The Road to Tyranny (containing some of the more infamous 911 conspiracy theories). In fact, it could be said that The Obama Deception is merely clever marketing in that it attacks Obama in a seemingly partisan way to bait audiences into hearing Jones’ traditional messages regarding totalitarian world government.

Hence, the Obama Deception is not the smear job some political partisans may have hoped for; instead, it is a discomforting launch point for discussion about the impotence of American democracy. If viewers come away from this film with one question, it is hopefully be why such readily available facts and inconsistencies must be highlighted in fringe films and not the so-called free press (from the Huffington Post to FOX News) that shapes the vast majority of public opinion and has been supposedly liberated by the internet.

A large grain of salt is required, as always, but some of this information simply can’t be dismissed out of hand (plus, we skeptics were given a prediction score-card on which to grade the film). Watch and decide for yourself.



Sphere: Related Content

04
Nov

2008 U.S. Presidential Election Day Blog

8:10am – Election Summary

Will history be made today in the United States of America?

Although the polls seem to be leaning heavily in Democrat Barrack Obama’s favour (the final FOX poll put him ahead of McCain by 7 points) this race is still too close to call. The winner will be determined according to which one of the following effects is stronger –

The Bradley Effect – Describes a phenomenon where a non-white candidate’s polling numbers are inflated when running against a white candidate. The cause is white voters telling pollsters they are undecided or in favour of the non-white candidate so not to appear “racist”. This effect was so named after Tom Bradley, a black candidate who lost the 1992 California governor’s race despite being well ahead in the polls.

The Cellphone Effect – Most polls do not target cellphones. Obama supporters tend to be younger and use cell phones as their primary source of communication. The same can be said of the urban poor, who also are suspected to favour Obama over McCain. With their numbers unaccounted for, Obama’s support could be far above what has been reported in the media.

In terms of history, Obama will be America’s first black president … at least as America defines black. Not to bore one with technicalities, but Obama is probably less than 50% black – his mother (Ann Dunham) is white while his father belongs to the Kenyan Luo tribe. Obama’s father was a Muslim – a minority within the Luo and an indicator that he may be mixed with Arabic (though this has never been proven). Nonetheless, the 1 drop rule persists in America and to Obama is the “black guy” for this election.

Whoever wins, the election was a great disappointment. What could have been a high-profile battle of ideology for the ages instead denigrated into a vile partisan hate-fest where dead grandmothers, developmentally-disabled sons and teenage pregnancies all trumped ideas and plans. Small town white America bared its inner racist to the world while some of black America thought of little more than putting one of “their own” in office – regardless of what the man stood for. Some people saw the election as a final chance to voice their displeasure towards George W Bush while others tried to sidetrack it into another tiresome abortion referendum. The economy was a fleeting 5-day discussion, despite the fact that its fragile state imperils any other pet causes that small sects of Americans may conceive.

I started this election a McCain supporter because substance should always trump flashy rhetoric. Sure I want a black guy in office because middle class blacks are tired of being lumped together with the thugs and drug addicts. However, Obama’s campaign lacked substance in my view and the nation’s finances cannot afford his plans to expand health care or any other attempt to “spread the wealth” as he puts it. Luckily for Obama, John McCain’s campaign went surreal by first choosing an obscure fundamentalist-courting governor as a running mate then by launching a “southern strategy lite” where by Obama’s demographic differences were lightly touched upon to the expected jeering of scared rednecks. If McCain was ever a maverick, he sacrificed it the minute he signed up with the evangelical cheesecake. He disappointed me greatly and my support moved cautiously towards Obama.

9:05 pm – Early Lead for Obama

A big early lead more-like. Projections show a 174-49 lead. Master Republican strategist Karl Rove has already gone on record to declare Obama will win a landslide. Despite all the controversy created by Congressman John Murtha (referring to his state as racist), Pennsylvania seems to be giving Obama the nod. Florida is close, which is bad news for McCain because he needs to win that state after losing PA. Although the horizon looks bright for Obama … slight skepticism would still be prudent.

A total blowout for Obama would be tragic in one way – John McCain’s career should not end with such a stunning defeat. Unfortunately he took the reigns of a battered GOP as a moderate when the moderates were flocking to the Democrat Party. He had to make a deal with a hard-right evangelical base that doesn’t trust him and was forced to be the front-man for all kinds of ugly activity.

CNN made an interesting observation – race was statistically NOT an issue with voters. Obama is handily leading among voters who race was a factor and those who said race wasn’t a factor. Conversely, age is costing McCain dearly, with Obama enjoying approximately 75% support among voters who declared age is a factor.

9:40pm – A Surprise

Ohio has given its electoral votes to Obama as well. Assuming Obama will win California no matter what, McCain has to win nearly every remaining state to acquire the necessary 270 electoral votes. Unfortunately, these states include Hawaii, Oregon and Washington – likely Democrat-leaning states. The GOP have turned off news telecasts in their hotel reception for McCain, all but conceding defeat.

11:00pm – Victory

Obama wins Virginia, another key state. CNN has declared Barrack Obama the 44th president of the United States. 297-139. History has been made!

CNN obviously wanted to make history as well, given their news room looks like a Stark Trek set. Political analysts quickly dissected statistics on huge touch screen monitors and conversed with 3D holograms of reporters “beamed” into the studio.

11:25pm – McCain’s Speech Very Classy

John McCain delivered one of the best speeches I’ve ever heard and he doesn’t even seem to be reading it. He’s managed to make the GOP faithful cheer for the historic significance of the election and took the entire blame for the failure of the campaign (which the public resisted). His tone was not even and not embittered. McCain’s reference to Sarah Palin drew mostly cheers but a surprising number of boos. Sarah Palin looks nearly ready to shed a tear. The constant boos from the crowd are definitely annoying McCain. Quotable line: “We never hide from history; We make history”

Honestly, it’s regrettable McCain had to run in this election.

11:58pm – Obama’s Acceptance Speech

What I wouldn’t give to be in that audience …

Obama’s initial message was obvious: yes we did. The crowd actually cheered for John McCain the first time his name was mentioned. Grace in victory is a good trait. Obama played heavily to skeptics who think he’s an elitist by highlighting the grassroots nature of his campaign – from the humble beginnings to the millions of ordinary Americans who made him a household name. Very wise of the President-elect to list all the problems he is going to face (mortgage meltdown, Afghanistan, recession). Just like a lawyer, he’s throwing in mitigating language (“we may not get there in one year, or even one term”) but his offer of hope was followed by frenzied chants of “yes we can!” (which were repeated many times by Obama and his audience in a call/response fashion).

Obama’s seemed to have started his term immediately by giving commands to the audience to get involved right away in community building and not see the election victory as a victory but rather an opportunity. He reached across the divide to moderate GOP’s by quoting Lincoln and reminding the audience that the Republicans started in Illinois and that their values really “aren’t so different”

The public was eating out of his hand and that speech will also be one for the ages.

Addendum

Robert Fulford, a staunch conservative and highly critical of Obama’s platform, has delivered a summary for the ages on the historical significance of the campaign:

Robert Fulford: A Divide has Been Crossed

Sphere: Related Content

24
Oct

Final Thoughts on the 2008 US Election

After months of research, I know where this site’s bread is buttered in terms of traffic and it sure as hell isn’t political discussions. Alas, the US election is fascinating, if only because of the substantive message behind its lack of substance. Below is a collection of points originally posted at Jack’s Newswatch. My regards to all the admirable souls at Jack’s who endured and subsequently challenged/refined these opinions …

Hidden Agendas: Has Barrack Obama “Changed his Spots” for this Election?

I don’t think he has, but what were those spots to begin with? If you’re an aspiring black politician, you’ve got two basic ways to get into the game -

1) Faux civil rights crusader for the left wing
2) Token attack dog for the right wing against faux civil rights crusaders

Without delving into which which works better, the advantage to #1 is a captive black vote – especially if you are a great orator. The hard left basically usurped the Booker T Washington approach to attaining equality and replaced it with a self-pitying, government-dependent approach. Their underlying message of “it’s not your fault” of course resonates with a community in terrible economic shape and whose previous attempts at independence were intentionally thwarted. Their message? “Under Marxism, you will live just as well as THEM”.

One person this would not resonate with, at least empathetically, is Barrack Obama. He is half-white, well-educated, well-traveled and has generally enjoyed a better quality of life than nearly the entire world population. He does understand, however, how to attain power. He knows that in order to get the black vote you need to show the whip marks on your back, and in order to get the white liberal vote you need to say “those whip marks don’t matter – we can CHANGE the future”.

Obama was implicitly through with the likes of Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, and Acorn the moment he went mainstream and appeared to be giving Hillary Clinton a good run for Democratic nominee. When Rev. Wright wouldn’t shut up Obama dumped him explicitly. There are several such stories from his Chicago days and I’m surprised no one’s highlighted them.

Obama’s a politician, not a marxist or a race-radical … or a messianic agent of change. Frankly, I don’t know why he doesn’t chase real money by becoming a CEO or Televangelist, but that’s his choice. His record proves but one thing – he’ll imply what you want to hear to get your vote and provide enough loopholes to back out when he needs to impress the next set of people. Classic lawyer. Expect many exposes from jilted ex-associates in the coming years.

Underwhelming Choices: How did this Election Boil Down to McCain vs. Obama?

Obama - Black Swan (read the link – I’m not trying to be a smart ass!!). I believe the DNC planned for Hillary to take the crown and defeat the GOP with ease. They did not count on the ground swell of grassroots support for Obama, who tapped into liberal angst and their desire for a non-politician looking politician. Both Obama and Ron Paul (his right wing, wild-eyed equivalent) cashed in large via small internet donations and have an army of unflinching acolytes.

McCain - To win the GOP nomination McCain defeated a cross-dressing serial divorcee, a reclusive Mormon, a congressman turned TV actor who essentially plays himself, a Baptist preacher who is unafraid to talk about his trailer park roots and a conspiracy-minded maverick who inspired the makers of Zeitgeist. It’s fair to say that the GOP -love them or not- did not supply their A-list for this election. Odds are the A-listers, or at least those with hopes for a long and fruitful career, had no interest in presiding over the Bush legacy (record debt, infinite wars, international infamy, broken markets). A subsequent GOP president would be taking the fall for America’s woes – there’s no point in detractors attacking Bush since he won’t be running again. The point? The GOP, deep down, doesn’t even expect to win and if they do they do not want any of their real bright stars to live in infamy. Why not choose McCain, who’s at least 8 years past his prime? Same logic applies to a VP, so why not select an obscure governor willing to squander her integrity on WWE style jingoism? Maybe she can even out-star Obama. Meanwhile the real brains of the GOP have headed for the hills of bipartisanship, ready to return when the carnage of this failed election / failed presidency is over. McCain is a sacrificial lamb, whether or not he wins.

Is it Time to Return to Old-Fashioned Values in America?

The old way of life had serious problems as well. It would be to America’s detriment to return to days gone by. The real solution is the least appealing one – trying something new. Socialist systems have proven economically disastrous while Classical liberalism (which is now called conservatism) was never designed to accommodate corporations, globalization or complex financial instruments. The type of Christianity practiced by many Americans (which I do not believe represent the views of entire Christian world) would lead to a second civil war if enshrined at the government level. All of the aforementioned systems may have good elements, but none can be adopted wholesale – they were developed for simpler times.

What about Sarah?

Sarah Palin I do not trust. She may connect with many Americans but not the kind whose empowerment has taken America down a very good path. Of course she may be a total wind-up like Obama (can’t believe so many people think he’s actually going to turn America socialist) but to her followers … it’s real. There will be consequences for making gay rights and abortion front-row issues during an economic meltdown and massive shift of capital eastwards.

Many conservatives claim that Palin has been unfairly trivialized by the media. The only seriously petty attack I’ve seen in mainstream sources is the recent one about her campaign-financed wardrobe. The GOP can do whatever it wants with its own campaign money. If they really think they’re going to get some lift (no pun intended!) from spending $150k on clothes vs $20k that’s their business. This is far less important than Palin’s willingness to break with McCain’s stances on gay marriage.

Are Blacks Being Racist by Overwhelmingly Supporting Obama?

1) Blacks vote 90% Democrat, regardless of candidate.
Current estimate of support for Obama = 95%
95% – 90% = 5%
Obama has received a maximum of 5% from from the “brothas”.
In terms of swinging the election, the effect is 13% (black population) * 60% (vote rate for adult blacks in 2004) * 5% (Extra votes for Obama over Democrat Norm) = 0.39% of population. I don’t think John McCain is losing sleep over this issue.

2) Previous black candidacy runs …
a) Jesse Jackson (DEM): Failure at party level; Negligible black vote
b) Alan Keyes (REP): Failure at party level; No known black vote
c) Ezola Foster [VP] (Reform): Failure at national level; No known black vote
d) Al Sharpton (DEM): Failure at party level; Negligible black vote

3) African-Americans != Americans from Africa
These two groups don’t get along. Former stereotypes latter are savages. Latter stereotypes former are violent and lazy. Race does not imply ethnicity or culture.

4) Voting Obama over Palin = No Brainer when Palin (oops, must have meant to say McCain) is using a Southern Strategy.

Who is going to Win this Election?

The polls are completely unreliable. In the same day FOX reported Obama having a 9 point lead and later that the candidates were dead even. If I were betting I’d put $100 on McCain since so many people think Obama has it in the bag. The winnings would be phenomenal.

Sphere: Related Content




Further Research


RSSQuick Shots




Categories


Archives