Obama wins big!

I awoke this morning to hear an excited Jim Naughtie talking about Obama's win. My hopes have turn out right. Just as they have for millions of Americans and millions more around the world. Whatever else the last couple of years have taught us, the most important lesson is that we are one world. A few irresponsible loan sharks can bring down the entire economic system! Wow, what a challenging life it all is.

Barack Obama is the catalayst for change. He's the match that will light a new torch. However, we must not expect him to do it alone. The rest of us have to help in that change.

I was wondering this morning what the Founding Fathers would have thought of it all. In fact, those that settled in America 400 years ago would not have envisioned anything like it. Not even FORTY years ago, to think about it. I can remember George Wallace remonstrating with hecklers - "You punks get out of the auditorium!", he rather delicately declared. And another famous line - "Anyone who lays down in front of ma car gets run right over!" (His grammar by the way!). Those days have really gone.

The truth is that Obama represents not just black people, whatever that means. He is mixed race. His mother was white, his father a Kenyan on a student exchange. Obama is truly African-American. He has family in Kenya. But he is more than being a stereotype. He is the representative of immigrants, of the middle classes, of the socially mobile, of the aspirant, of the educated, of the poor, of whoever. Because of that the vast coalition who voted for him and the vast coalition around the world who support him and wish him well, anyone can claim his representation as being for them.

I would hope we can stop referring to the "black president" (however important his election is) and just support President-elect Barack Obama as a human being with a vision for change.

McCain pollster reckons it's not over!

I've just heard on Newsnight a Republican pollster saying to Jeremy Paxman that if McCain lost the popular vote (by two percentage points he reckons) but takes the Electoral College, then McCain would be happy to be president. Paxman thought this a bit rich, but the pollster said "it's how the game is played".

Now, as I contemplate bed, does it all come down to being a game? The worst case scenario for American politics is precisely this conundrum. A president esconced in the White House with the help of the Electoral College in defiance of the popular mandate. The crafty Founding Fathers, themselves not given much to democracy, were keen to promote freedom at the expense of democracy. Ever since, it seems to me that American history is about Democracy trying to find equality with Freedom. I find it very peculiar that in the modern United States there have to be Zimbabwean type lines in order to cast a ballot. Surely the powers-that-be can rustle up a few more polling places? Freedom to vote but a struggle for democracy!

My hope that Obama wins is that for Americans they will get a new broom to sweep aside the corporate abuses, the manifestation of government corruption, and the denial of easy ballot access. Freedom for the average person to count in the process.

I hope it is a clean win, but apparently there are bevvies of lawyers waiting to pounce should a hanging chad be found. An Obama win should be some sort of guarantee that this will be cleaned up. After all, as the BBC is saying, we (meaning the British) don't have a vote, but it affects us anyway. And France and Germany and Canada and Mexico and..........................

Ron Paul to win a moral victory?

It could happen. A moral victory in November! Ron Paul is currently winning over more to his views on the economic distress that we all face. This nice piece from RusUSA.com outlines why Ron Paul succeeds where George Bush is failing.

Amid the financial turmoil, the U.S. President George W. Bush daily delivers his views on the nation’s crippled economy. Those who hope to succeed him in office claim only they know how to get America off its knees. But the one winning the public trust battle is congressman and former presidential candidate Ron Paul.

And why is he winning the public trust? Amanda Pelletier is one month into her first year at university, she is getting a part-time job to help her parents pay a $45,000 college loan. Social circles and date nights now come second for the 18-year old who sees her professional prospects collapsing.

“I feel like Dr Paul's message is the only one that makes sense,” Amanda says. One wonders what would be the Republican party's fortunes at this time if Dr. Paul was the standard-bearer!

Sarah Palin and the Trooper Truth!

I wasn't very sure about Sarah Palin when she first came on the world scene, and was effectively introduced to all non-Alaskans. I've met American women like her before. All porcelain smooth looks with an electric current running underneath. On meeting, you could get a warm reception or a nasty shock from the experience.

What this so-called "trooper-gate" tells me is that she is definitely a tough cookie. The investion has found she abused her powers as governor. I think she gets muddled up as to whether she is a hockey mom or a Governor of a State in the union. I'll give her the benefit of the doubt. She took against her brother-in-law, big time! So she wanted him to "feel the pain". One way was to get him sacked and possibly to sack anybody who wouldn't sack the sacker. Basically, she let her feelings run away with herself.

Now, however much she may want to deny it, this does have a bearing on the election. As Vice-President, would she do something similar? Would she get someone fired because she had a bad day? It goes to show integrity. It goes to show honour. But above all it goes to show character.

I don't care what she does in her own life, who she mixes with. That's not my business. But politicians aim to be in authority, where they can authorise laws. This puts them in the driving seat. As passengers we are allowed to know a bit about the driver.

Another menacing fact is that, once the McCain camp knew of this, they were all over Anchorage like wasps over jam. They were trying to "contain it". But we don't need this kind of political activity. It would have been better to admit what was happening. I'm against all this subterfuge. Mrs.Palin would score better with me if she just admitted that she got hacked off with her ex brother-in-law. We can all get angry, upset or annoyed in life. Covering it all up is many times worse.

"Can I call you Joe?"

The vice-presidential debate appears to have struck the right notes all round. It seems the main purpose of these debates is for the candidates not to make any gaffs. It's OK to speak prepared stuff, so long as you don't fluff your lines. Sarah Palin acquitted herself quite well. She was assured and spoke in reasoned tones. She still hasn't got any proper answer about leaving Iraq. Roughly translated, she just says, "How long is a piece of string?". Joe Biden also came across OK. No sexist jokes or superior putdowns. He was a good supporting act for Barack Obama.

So it doesn't really lead us anywhere, except to say that Palin didn't help to implode McCain's campaign, as some pundits were predicting, or secretly hoping for.

Ron Paul endorses Chuck Baldwin

Ron Paul has come out and endorses Chuck Baldwin! Here is part of what he said.

"The Libertarian Party Candidate admonished me for “remaining neutral” in the presidential race and not stating whom I will vote for in November. It’s true; I have done exactly that due to my respect and friendship and support from both the Constitution and Libertarian Party members. I remain a lifetime member of the Libertarian Party and I’m a ten-term Republican Congressman. It is not against the law to participate in more then one political party. Chuck Baldwin has been a friend and was an active supporter in the presidential campaign.

I’ve thought about the unsolicited advice from the Libertarian Party candidate, and he has convinced me to reject my neutral stance in the November election. I’m supporting Chuck Baldwin, the Constitution Party candidate."

So now it's moving on time. Ron Paul Republicans either vote Republican, Constitution, Libertarian or just stay at home. They may just vote for Obama. But the vote is split whatever happens.

Read more here at Reason.com

Obama outspends McCain!

What was I saying about the Palin effect? Just as I'm doing my morning swoop of the news, I come across the campaign contribution figures for August. They show Obama got a financial boost after Palin joined the Republican ticket. Barack Obama received a minor fundraising bump after he named Joe Biden as his running mate but raked in huge sums after Republican rival John McCain picked Sarah Palin to be his vice presidential nominee. Does that tell you something? There is talk that McCain may be having second thoughts.

If the vice-president slot is anything to go by, then Joe Biden (who has a few cleaned up skeletons removed from his cupboard) is ahead of Sarah Palin (who has some skeletons, plus a witchhunter, yet to be sanitised and removed from her cupboard) in the media tit-for-tat stakes.

This report from the LA Times is interesting. I get the impression the Republicans are slightly rattled. They should have picked Ron Paul, but hey, that was then and now is now. On this sort of contribution ration, Obama will win if money talks!

Palin is 'failin'!

I'm hoping I'm not becoming obsessed with Sarah Palin, but everywhere you look concerning the US Presidential election, her name pops up. It's a bit like shooting ducks at the fairground.

I was looking around for a take on Obama and found an interesting article by Wayne Brown of the Nation News from Barbados. Wayne thinks Sarah Palin is 'failin' and he paints a fairly accurate picture.

When she was picked by McCain the whole world went "Sarah who?" and then they started reading up on her. Having done that, they've made an opinion. She has galvanised Democrats into standing firm and she will probably not attract the independents. But the big question is, as Wayne puts it, will she cause Republicans of a less conservative viewpoint to peel off?

He says, "It's a fair guess that even moderate Republicans will increasingly develop immunity to her charms as they get a better look at the 'replacement president' John McCain is offering them." Replacement President? Now that's the crucial issue in the whole campaign. Americans do have to ask the question "Do I want her as president?" Unlike previous contests this is a bit more of an obvious conundrum.

Todd Palin seals his lips!

The husband of John McCain's running mate, Sarah Palin, has refused to give evidence in the "Troopergate" investigation of his wife's alleged abuse of power as governor of Alaska. Troopergate is the name given to this alleged scandal over accusations that Sarah Palin sacked the state's public safety commissioner because he refused to fire her former brother-in-law, a state trooper. I don't think I'd like to get on the wrong side of this woman. Unlike the easily-pleased gathering at the Republican Convention, I sense she may be a little like fluff around cold steel. I hope I'm wrong, because if not, and she gets elected, John McCain is in for a hard time!

Meanwhile, as the investigation gathers slight speed, state senators have claimed that unco-operative witnesses are effectively sidetracking the probe until after US election day. Perish the thought!

Todd Palin was among 13 people subpoenaed by the Alaska legislature. Are the others so tightlipped? Come on Sarah, own up, tell us what happened and let this all die down.

Ron Paul Hosts Third Party Press Conference

Ron Paul decides it's "a plague on both your houses"!

Ron Paul has decided that neither McCain or Obama are going to cut the mustard when it comes to changing things. Instead, he endorsed the presidential candidates for all (somewhat reasonable in size) third parties. He asked all his supporters, and Americans in general, to vote for one of these candidates, not for the leaders of either political party.

After he read the statement, Paul went on to talk about the two major political parties and the current political debate in the United States, and the two-party system in general. “I’ve come to the conclusion,” Paul said, “that presidential elections turn out to be a charade more than anything else. The endless discussion that goes on for ever… and all the talk about things that are unimportant… it just goes on and on and you just think about all this talk on television pretending there is this great difference… and really, when you look at it, there is no difference - because they do not address this subjects. We have other candidates … that disagree with the other candidates and… the important thing here is ‘who is the majority?’”

“There is no doubt in my mind,” he went on to say, “that the majority is on our side. We represent the majority of the American people. 60% of the American people are unhappy with their choice.”

I get the impression that McCain and Obama together will be lucky to get 40% of the America people to vote for them. It is a great pity that for many in the US democracy passes them by. Much the same as in the UK. Anybody ask us if we wanted acres abolished?

Life and death matters for Palin

I'm currently a bit fixated with Sarah Palin. Not in any morally dubious way. Rather that she is seen as espousing "values". Having just read up on her she appears to be the traditional "quite contrary" Christian evangelical with conservative opinions.

She is "pro-life", which means she is against abortion but for the killing of certain prisoners. She is "pro-gun", which means she is against gun control but for the keeping of personal arsenals. She is "pro-oil and natural gas resource development" which means she is for oil exploration and against endangered species protection.

Matthew Wright on the Wright Stuff said, "I like her. She shoots animals", giving a cheeky grin to the camera. That's the odd thing about Christian fundamentalists. They seem to have guns and God and life and love and sex and sin all a bit mixed up. Shooting animals and electrocuting wrongdoers sits quite easily with a selective view of the sanctity of life.

I still have difficulties with the Republican ticket. It seems odd that a self-professed Creationist would want to let Alaska fall into the hands of those that might dispoil that very Creation she believes in. I've got more thinking to do!

Sarah Palin takes the Scottish Nationalist line!

So living in Alaska gives you some form of political independence? Sarah Palin is sounding ever so much like Alex Salmond used to do. He's now First Minister in a devolved Scottish Parliament making sure he's not far from Scotland's oil. Palin thinks the oil under the ground and the seas around Alaska is for her to control. "It's Alaskan oil!", she purrs. She would like to "sell" Alaskan oil to the US. She claims that Alaska struck a deal 50 years ago (on entry into the Union) with the Federal Government to exploit the resources of Alaska. If Alaska can't do that, will she think it best to go it alone?

She now has a stark choice. It's either going to be Alaskan oil or American oil. It can't be both. As VP will she have to eat her words? This little offering is on the Glenn Beck show (before she got the VP ticket place) and she seems to be on good form (she comes in at 4.18 on the clock!). On Iraq, she says "We're fighting, in some sense, over energy supplies". Well, she said it!

Watch this space, I say!

Jesse Ventura on the Palin problem!

So much said in a week about Sarah Palin! Now Jesse Ventura, former Governor of Minnesota, weighs in with his ten cents worth of comment. In some ways he's got a point. He says she is too inexperienced. She probably is. He says, "Now here she is, after not even having been there for two years, she’s now going to be the VP!? I mean, realistically, John McCain could drop dead a week into office. She would then be the top person in the world. Is she prepared for that? I don’t believe so, having been a governor. After not even serving two years as governor, I was not prepared to be president."

If John McCain did die in office and Sarah Palin took over, would she be a disaster? My guess is that she would not be so ineffective or ill-prepared. She'd run the show fairly competently. She strikes me as a no-nonsense woman, who is very focused on firm advice and getting the job done. From the TV interviews given by "ordinary Alaskans" they seem to agree. However, she knows precious little about Washington ways. If McCain did go before he had given her the lowdown on pork barrels and sleaze bags, she may not get the difference quite measured up. In that sense, Jesse has a point.

And I think Jesse is too hard on himself. He knows the wicked ways of life and how to confront them. He took on the Minnesota establishment and won. As a pro-wrestler he must have seen some lobbying of the wrestling kind. He'd have made quite a formidable president, if a bit unconventional.

If Sarah Palin ever gets to sit behind the desk in the Oval Office any time soon, it will be because the American people thought the prospect an OK one. It's up to them whether they think she's experienced or otherwise!

Sarah Palin's spot of bother!

I must confess I had never heard of Sarah Palin before last weekend. Now she's the talk of everywhere and everybody. My take on this is that she appears to be a fairly normal woman who entered politics to "do some good" and got a taste for it. Now she's Governor of Alaska. Good on those lumberjacks and fist-wielding fishermen for thinking she's OK!

So what's all the fuss? It's just because the liberal-minded, but greedy, media are having forty fits for not seeing that McCain was going to pick her! They also don't like it that she is a bible-based clean-as-a-whistle Christian. Not my cup of tea, but then I reckon she's got a bit of savvy. She'll not go all out on some Tammy Faye Bakker tears and simpering session, trying to curry favour with Americans in the lower 48. Just because she's who she is and says what she believes does not disallow her from keeping to her beliefs. Her daughter is pregnant. It is a family matter. Barack Obama is right to defend his opponent's privacy on this.

Let her be criticised or championed for what she has done or not done politically. Personally I think this says more about her critics than it does about her. The only thing I'd say in a rather cheeky manner is that she named her children Track, Willow, Piper, and Bristol. Makes them sound a bit like a quartet of small planes in Sarah Ferguson's Budgie the Little Helicopter!

McCain's taxman v. Obama's taxman! Taxing times ahead?

John McCain's senior economic adviser is Doug Holtz-Eakin and Barack Obama's senior economic adviser is Austan Goolsbee. The BBC had the grand idea of putting them head to head.

Mr Goolsbee said, "Barack Obama's tax cuts for ordinary Americans are three times larger than John McCain's. The way that John McCain's package ends up being three to four trillion dollars more is that they give humungous tax cuts to high income people and large corporations." One in the eye for McCain.

Mr Holtz-Eakin told the BBC, "In this economy in the past six months with over 400,000 jobs lost we've seen the small businesses - those with less than 50 employees - add 283,000 jobs."

He underlined the importance of not damaging those small businesses. "Keep them in a position where they don't have onerous health care costs and mandates to provide expensive benefits to their employees." Which basically implies that Obama would stifle enterprise.

I think the only way to get out of this mess is for BOTH business and individuals to feel that they are succeeding. Just favouring one only will just cause more problems.

Listen here to the debate.

McCain and Obama able in Christian den!

It is typically American today that the two candidates from the main political parties have to go to some born-again Christian temple to open their hearts, minds and souls. In England it is usually the local vicar or some civic dignatory that puts on a "hustings" event. Not so in America, or at least not anymore. There you have some preacher, probably vetted to see if there are no skeletons in the cupboard, introducing the duo so they can empty their closets in public to show off their skeletons.

I would not put much store by these events. The devil in me thinks it is partly to boost the career of the preacher concerned. Coming from a part of Christendom where this kind of publicity-led preaching is unheard of (apart from Anglicans getting publicity from disagreements!), I find it slightly uneasy that prim and proper people should be delving into the personal lives of others in such a way. The troubling aspect for me about "born-again Christians" is that the "I'm Saved!" mantra dispels much of the Faith, Hope and Charity aspect of Christianity. They don't apparently have Hope, they have rock solid certainty that they have front row seats in Heaven. This, it seems, gives them the right to sit and judge others who do not have the "I'm Saved!" mentality.

I see Bob Barr is getting all het up about not being invited. I wouldn't worry Bob. You're better off out (to paraphrase a Eurosceptic message!). Apparently "the only people getting into the event are Obama, McCain and those who reportedly paid $500 to $2,000 to the church to sit in the audience." Filthy lucre, Bob. Stick to being a libertarian and forget the huffing and puffing!

McCain tries to trash Obama - Olympic style!

John McCain's people are all about negative advertising, it would appear. We are to suppose that the average American is sitting watching TV thinking "Gee, this Obama is a screwball! I won't vote for HIM!" I have this vision of young Kevin from the Wonder Years as his dad tries to watch the TV news so he can give his squabbling family his take on the world's problems. Kevin shrugs his shoulders as usual!

Surely all this is a waste of time. Americans are crying out for a new way forward. Obama is the only one available that will give positive action in this direction. This response from Tucker Bounds, a McCain spokesman, is disingenuous in the extreme. He says McCain is "focused on ensuring that voters have the best information possible to make an informed decision on Election Day." I doubt that very much.

However, if the US media was not so strapped down to the floor by advertising moguls and corporate lobbyists, then I would believe him. However, the real world suggests he is wrong.

I would normally be actively thinking right now that McCain was the best guy. He's a Republican, and all the rest. But he mixes too much with lobbyists for my liking. Come November, should McCain win, these trough-snouters will be in their best bib and tuckers all salivating at the thought of more riches. Which could mean more ruin for others.

If McCain changes tack and tells us what he would actually do I might be more impressed. But by merely negatively attacking the messenger of much wanted change, he shows a paucity of ideas.

Obama's tired of tired tire gauge jokes!

I well remember an American cousin of mine telling me in the 70's that a good way to save money on gas was to have your car tyres pumped up to the right pressure. So how come John McCain didn't know this. My cousin was US Army trained. Did McCain never get to check his army trucks over? Were all his Jeeps running OK?

The truth of all this is that the US economy has been taken through a hedge backwards by the cost of the Iraq war, the Wall Street money grubbers and the sub-prime prize shysters. They all got drunk! Barack Obama is only saying that "every little helps" to borrow a phrase.

John McCain should tell us what he would actually do as president, not scoff at his opponent. If this tit-for-tat stuff goes on until November, none of us will be any the wiser and most be be considerably poorer!

Obama to be tried and tested the McCain way?

There's a well-known firm in Britain called McCain. They make "oven chips" which are potatoes neatly chipped, then frozen so the customer can put them in the oven to get something ressembling a deep fried potato chip that is the mainstay of fish and chips. How good this process is and how fine the results are has been the stuff of food scientists. They have tried to replicate the fat fryers in the domestic ovens.

Senator Obama is being seen by the Republican Party as an untried and untested potato head. They are gearing up to put him through the slicers and the ovens of the presidential campaign by seeing how he reacts to their barbs and broadsides. What a carry on? If this is to be the level of the debate, then Heaven help us all! We are being subjected to talk about shoe selection (Imelda Marcos style?), about personal tastes, and music appreciation. Does McCain always buy $500 shoes? It is all too banaal. We need a proper debate about dealing with the credit crunch fraudsters, the Iraq debacle, the world energy problems and the emerging economies of China, India and Brazil. If the established "Western World" goes to hell in a hand cart, what will the importance of a presidential candidate's shoes be?

Both parties need to get away from juvenile schoolyard propaganda and address the real issues. If being tried and tested is showing you have 50 years of experience, then it hasn't been a very good example in most cases. Barack Obama will fail or succeed only by his abilities to deal with "events". And no president deals with this in isolation. He has a team around him.

Being president is not like being Cinderella. Your shoes are not a pivotal part of the plotlines!