Enduring America

Enduring America (formerly Watching America) features blogs and podcasts by Professor Scott Lucas and guest bloggers, analysing developments in the United States, particularly the latest issues and trends in US foreign policy.



Disclaimer:

The views and opinions expressed here represent those of the the individual authors and do not in any way reflect those of the University of Birmingham, its institutions and organizations that the authors are involved with.

***This blog has now moved to http://enduringamerica.com/ ***

How the Arafat conspiracy theory was converted into a current political manoeuvre: Hamas is the “democratic” party seeking truth while its rival engages in “tyranny”.

Keeping the Change offers a concise, effective analysis of how the Iranian Government is trying to use threats to “national security” both to hold off and to denigrate the opposition movement.

The blog Revolutionary Road, a useful source of information throughout the post-election crisis, has posted a list of names of more than 60 people killed or missing and more than 300 detained since 12 June.

The Australian television show The Chaser’s War on Everything decided to put Yoo’s Bush-era legal theories into practice in his classroom.

H ow the Iranian Government is trying to use threats to “national security” both to hold off and to denigrate the opposition movement.

Six Grand Ayatollahs have made statements supporting demonstrations, two have been neutral, and one opposed. Amongst Ayatollahs, nine (including Hashemi Rafsanjani) have been supportive of at least some opposition demands, two neutral, and seven opposed.

Mohammad Abtahi: "The current conservative opposition to the vice presidential choice is in fact an attempt to convince the President that somehow without their presence, it would have been impossible for him to obtain a huge victory in the election."

Roger Cohen: "It was precisely emotion, and notions of good and evil, that the Obama administration had spent the previous months trying to drain from the charged U.S.-Iranian relationship."

This Wave is already in uncharted waters for the Islamic Republic, and I doubt any of us have the map to indicate where it goes.

More food for thought on Sunday. The website Mowjcamp, associated with Mir Hossein Mousavi, has claimed that “a few high-ranking prominent clergymen of Qom are applying pressure upon Khamenei in order to induce him to accept the protests of the public and clergy and abandon his support of Ahmadinejad”.

1) Can Khamenei really rely on the “foreign menace” to maintain the support of most of the Iranian population, especially if that means a political showdown with a Rafsanjani or a Mousavi?; 2) How far can the call to “morality” take precedence over the specific concerns over the Iranian system during and after the system?

(Apologies for the break in service as EA staff was scattered between music festivals and house moves this weekend. Check out website for great set of stories 17-20 July. Thanks to Mike Dunn for keeping everything ticking over.)

T oday on Enduring America

Rolling updates from inside the country....While the general position of Supreme Leader is to be respected as the highest authority, that respect does not necessarily have to be given to an individual who does not fulfil the duties of the position, in this case, Ayatollah Khamenei.A disucssion of the manoeuvres behind this Friday’s prayers, with Hashemi Rafsanjani presiding and a mass march which may include Mir Hossein Mousavi, Mohammad Khatami, and Mehdi Karroubi, and stories of possible compromise within the Iranian system.As the other 177 export licenses for arms to Israel proceed without restriction, one suspects that this affair is simply a little local difficulty.Paranoid Larry's ditty from 2006 might still have some relevance.

Rory Stewart: "After seven years of refinement, the policy seems so buoyed by illusions, caulked in ambiguous language and encrusted with moral claims, analogies and political theories that it can seem futile to present an alternative.”

The release of the five Iranians points to the emergence of an Iraqi Government that is no longer subject to the demands of the US military.

What is Tel Aviv’s next step in the manoeuvres between the US and Iran?

We’re not certain about the extent of the marches in Tehran yesterday (and, to be honest, I think the symbolic significance of the show of opposition outweighs any number), but others are trying to establish the size of the rallies.

Is the US acceptance of the 2500 units due to the specifics of private contracts and Israeli law on settlements, or have the two sides found common ground where both sides meet with some concessions?

Is the US acceptance of the 2500 units due to the specifics of private contracts and Israeli law on settlements, or have the two sides found common ground where both sides meet with some concessions?

"The Iranian authorities are using prolonged harsh interrogations, beatings, sleep deprivation, and threats of torture to extract false confessions from detainees arrested since the disputed June 12 presidential election."

How significant is the challenge to the regime and the role of Mojtaba Khamenei on and after the 12 June elections?

This two-way message is being laid out to maintain a balance between Iran and the US.

shows how torture has become a standard method of interrogation for the British intelligence services, and how everyone involved- from personnel on the ground to high-ranking government ministers- may be complicit.

In a series of case studies Ian Cobain of The Guardian shows how torture has become a standard method of interrogation for the British intelligence services, and how everyone involved- from personnel on the ground to high-ranking government ministers- may be complicit.

John Matlin: "Maybe I’m too old and jaded, maybe I’ve reached the age of pure cynicism but give me a politician any time who can get the investment banks to behave properly and lawfully, who can reduce loutish behaviour so we can walk city centres at night, who can find ways to reduce teenage pregnancies and who, if an American, can get guns off the streets. Find him or her and he or she can have as many affairs as he or she wants."

Jason Jones interviews three people — former Vice Presidents Ibrahim Yazdi and Mohammad Ali Abtahi and journalist Maziar Bahari — who have all been detained by the Iranian authorities.

T oday on Enduring America

"Doubtlessly, these events had another big victory for our people and that was the possibility to talk to the world and exhibit their real face, demands, and goals."

Iraq has been pushed back into the news because of a series of deadly bombings.

The moral may be that moving detainees about might buy time and a bit of breathing space, but it is no substitute for firm agreements.

T oday on Enduring America

Shirvin Zeinalzadeh: "The act of sitting down and talking or even being in the same room – far from minor successes — may now be lost."

Colette Mazzucelli: "The aftermath of the Islamic Republic’s national elections are a testament to the will of a people to protest in unprecedented ways against the results of the June 12 vote."

"We are no longer going to waste our energy. We have said what needed to be said to the world, however now it’s time to act rather efficiently."

On Saturday, a woman was watching demonstrations on Karegar Avenue in Tehran when she was shot in the chest by a paramilitary Basiji. A 40-second video captured the killing; within hours, “Neda” became an icon — witting or unwitting — for the political movement in Iran.

“It is apparent from this statement that Mousavi’s movement — and Mousavi himself — have evolved enormously in the past week….[This] is truly a revolutionary statement.”

Christopher Hill: "I don’t want to sound Pollyannish about that because these are trends that are fragile and ones that need to be nurtured every day.”

The Supreme Leader’s defiant rejection of any wrongdoing in these elections has put the ball firmly in Mousavi’s court.

Full Iran Coverage; Obama is Osama?; Bear Story of the Day

T oday on Enduring America

Iran - The Supreme Leader Speaks

T oday on Enduring America

Iran; US-Israel Relations

T oday on Enduring America

Crisis in Iran; Netanyahu on Israel-Palestine

T oday on Enduring America

Netanyahu’s magic? At the same time that he supposedly accepted the “two-state” peace process, his carefully-framed speech — for the moment — made it disappear.

“Talks with Iran are not a reward for good behavior; they’re only a consequence if the President makes the judgement that it’s in the best interests of the United States of America…. to talk to the Iranian regime. Our interests are the same before the election as after the election.”

Enduring America ’s Chris Emery on BBC News 24 on Saturday, giving one of the first reactions in Britain to the unfolding events in Iran....

"The priorities of the Obama administration are also still the same. Resolving the Israel-Palestine conflict means Iran cannot be pushed to the forefront as the immediate challenge. And in the longer term, the demands on the US from Afghanistan and Central Asia to relations with the wider Islamic world still mean that engagement is the preferred alternative. Irrespective of the outcome of the presidential election in Iran, there is no reason to suggest these will not be potentially effective strategies."

Crisis

T oday on Enduring America

Iran Votes

T oday on Enduring America

On the eve of today’s elections, Presidential candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi spoke with Al Jazeera. The clip is less than three minutes but packed with important declarations:

The Daily Telegraph : “Rather like the punk rock group the Sex Pistols, or the singer Pete Doherty, it is not unusual, apparently, for the president to plan a gig but then fail to show.”

President Obama’s envoy to the Middle East, George Mitchell, visited Israeli leaders on Tuesday and again established why he is an outstanding diplomat. Only problem? Someone is trying to out-flank him, and that someone is Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

How can we dare to be so bold? Because of Netanyahu’s own officials.

There have been a few dramatic (and misleading) headlines, but the gist of the IAEA’s conclusions are the same: no imminent Iran nuclear weapon and a call for transparency on the programme.

There have been a few dramatic (and misleading) headlines, but the gist of the IAEA’s conclusions are the same: no imminent Iran nuclear weapon and a call for transparency on the programme.

Wednesday’s election debate between Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and one of his challengers, Mir Hossein Mousavi, is still sending ripples through and outside Iran.

Given the US delay in moving its Embassy, how does Benjamin Netanyahu — facing a difficult position in his Cabinet and with Israeli public opinion — respond?

It may be less than 48 hours since the Obama speech, but the US and Israel are already manoeuvring — and testing each other — over Palestine.

Perhaps the most striking response to President Obama's speech is coming from Hamas officials, who are cautiously signalling that they are ready for discussions.

The wars may have ostensibly ended in Gaza and Sri Lanka, but the conflicts and hardships continue. As hundreds of thousands of residents languish in detention camps or endure a protracted siege, British medics trying to help also find themselves hindered — and worse — by Government officials.

As American and Britain news agencies continue to misunderstand and misrepresent President Obama’s strategic approach on Iran, Foreign Policy's The Cable offers an essential view from inside the Administration.

And so the paradox of Cairo: at the end of Obama’s hour, his exaltation of values across faiths comes to Earth in those buildings in East Jerusalem and across the West Bank. It is their spread, rather than the spread of goodwill or religious blessings, that will determine the fate of this President’s “right path”.

In a slight shift from his campaign trail promise, President Obama announced Monday that his administration’s message of “Change” has been modified to the somewhat more restrained slogan “Relatively Minor Readjustments in Certain Favorable Policy Areas.”

In a slight shift from his campaign trail promise, President Obama announced Monday that his administration’s message of “Change” has been modified to the somewhat more restrained slogan “Relatively Minor Readjustments in Certain Favorable Policy Areas.”

Last week, Enduring America’s John Matlin set out the British mega-scandal over the expenses of its Members of Parliament. Readers have noted that John’s analysis is complemented by that of two other Jons/Johns — Stewart and Oliver — as The Daily Show surveys English stiff-upper-lip anger, Sacklesschester, and The Eternal Wonder of the Great British Moat.

Last week, Enduring America’s John Matlin set out the British mega-scandal over the expenses of its Members of Parliament. Readers have noted that John’s analysis is complemented by that of two other Jons/Johns — Stewart and Oliver — as The Daily Show surveys English stiff-upper-lip anger, Sacklesschester, and The Eternal Wonder of the Great British Moat.

Karina Bracken: "It is in a cafe in Dublin that I meet Salman Ashraf, far from his native Swat Valley in Pakistan. He is gently spoken but speaks with sincerity and conviction about the recent events in his hometown of Mingora."

Karina Bracken: "It is in a cafe in Dublin that I meet Salman Ashraf, far from his native Swat Valley in Pakistan. He is gently spoken but speaks with sincerity and conviction about the recent events in his hometown of Mingora."

Last Sunday there was an important summit, in symbolism and possibly in policy, in Tehran. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad welcomed his Afghan and Pakistani counterparts, Hamid Karzai and Asif Ali Zardari.

Last Sunday there was an important summit, in symbolism and possibly in policy, in Tehran. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad welcomed his Afghan and Pakistani counterparts, Hamid Karzai and Asif Ali Zardari.

One useful way of considering tomorrow’s grand Middle Eastern speech by President Obama is to recall that it was supposed to be delivered three or four months ago.

The aim is to keep Gaza at subsistence and offer a contrast with the West Bank, which in theory benefits from foreign aid and economic and political development. Hamas supporters will then realize their mistake. The plan has not gone well, however.”

“ The aim is to keep Gaza at subsistence and offer a contrast with the West Bank, which in theory benefits from foreign aid and economic and political development. Hamas supporters will then realize their mistake. The plan has not gone well, however.”

“I’ve done work in prison,” she said. “This is worse than being in prison. How people can be so cruel to other people– I don’t understand, I just don’t understand it.

Last week, there was another series of developments — some illuminating, some confusing, all disturbing.

On Enduring America

28 MAY

22 May 2009

Obama and Cheney Speeches; Israel Undoes Obama's Grand Plan

Crises in Pakistan, Sri Lanka; Obama's Two-Week Middle East Window

T oday on Enduring America

The Obama Administration is scrambling, against a 4 June deadline, for something to offer the Arab world. And the prospects aren’t looking good.

Today some outlets are noting the immediate humanitarian (and longer-term political) issue: the more than 250,000 refugees now in overcrowded camps.

We are not convinced that the 2 million displaced in Pakistan will be testifying to Washington’s long-term aim of economic progress and security if and when they hear Clinton’s words about the power of US benevolence and technology.



T oday on Enduring America

Mahmoud Reza Golshanpazhooh: "There may be no escaping of the fact that in the extremely realistic world of international relations the presence of a window of hope may be a source of optimism and pessimism at the same time.

On the day-to-day scorecard of statesmanship, each President got a Win. Obama blocked the Israeli insistence of Iran First. Netanyahu, however, ensured that Palestine First would be a far from quick and complete process.

Obama continues to impress with his day-to-day tactics, and he did so yesterday against another master tactician, but as strategists, he and his Administration have put themselve in a difficult position.

Re our Saturday post on the emergence of 15 of the photographs whose release was blocked by President Obama: Italian newspapers La Repubblica and Il Corriere della Sera have now published some of the photos.

Obama's Excuses, Pentagon's Black Budgets, Israel's Shifting Alliances

T oday on Enduring America

8 May 2009

Afghanistan-Pakistan Special plus...Clinton for the Supreme Court?

T

oday on Enduring America

Hamas Talks, Afghanistan-Pakistan Politics,

and The Legacy of Ronald Reagan

T

oday on Enduring America

6 May 2009

US Shift on Israel-Syria?; Bringing Jesus to Afghanistan

T oday on Enduring America

---------------------- 14 November 2008

False News, Real News, The Economy, and...Truck Nutz Today on Enduring America Fact x Importance = News: If Only the New York Times Were Real Which do you prefer: Wednesday’s spoof front page or the story by Judith Miller on the Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction?

----------------------

13 November 2008

Pakistan , Venezuela , and Obama the “Hawk”

Today on Enduring America

Fact x Importance = News: Pakistan

"There have been a swirl of news stories in the last 72 hours about the conflicts in Afghanistan and the Northwest Frontier of Pakistan. Beyond the escalation in bombings and shootings, the most significant may offer clues to future US policy."

Same-Sex Marriage: Six Minutes From (and About) The Heart

"In the excitement over the Obama victory in the United States , there was a significant setback at the polls. Voters passed a Constitutional amendment, 'Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California .'"

Obama, Chavez, and a New Relationship? The Strange Case of the Houston Consulate

"The Stonecypher Report picks up on a flap over the Venezuelan Consulate in Houston , Texas , and draws an interesting conclusion."

"It takes Freedland quite a while to get to his point, but when he does, it’s a stinger: 'Obama is no dove. He is just a much smarter hawk, his eye more sharply focused.'"

----------------------

12 November 2008

Thoughts on an Obama Presidency

Today on Enduring America:

An Obama Presidency: The Niggles Begin

Reaction to a speech by Senator Patrick Leahy in Dublin: “I am still worried that the Democrats think they will look ‘soft’ on national security if they challenge — at least without assured support from some Republicans — the Bush Administration’s grab of executive power.”

Niggles About Obama: Canuckistan Responds

“The Bush Administration has left a counter-terrorist toxic waste dump for its successors to clean up.”



Homeland Security: Obama = Nazi/Communist/Socialist Alert

“Today’s Vigilant Citizen Award has to go to Republican Congressman Paul Broun of Georgia.

“That’s because Broun has uncovered Obama’s plot to impose an American Gestapo upon us. He tipped off the Associated Press on Monday, ‘It may sound a bit crazy and off base, but the thing is, he’s the one who proposed this national security force.”

----------------------

11 November 2008

The Obama Administration, Transitions, and Iraq

Today on Enduring America:

----------------------

10 November 2008

Celebrating Bankers, Palestine, and the Kristol-Palin Axis of Determination

Today on Enduring America:

Celebrating Bankers: The $140 Billion Tax Cut in the Bailout

Obama, His Chief of Staff, and Palestine: The 2002 Interview

The Tinkling of Kristol: Turning an Election into Dogs (and Palin)

Why We Love Conservapedia: Melchester

The Inside Story of the Palin Nomination: Follow-Up



----------------------

9 November 2008

Questions for the President-Elect: Russia and Israel/Palestine

Today on Enduring America:

Russia to Obama: The Follow-Up

Obama and Israel/Palestine: The Significant One-Liner

Great Election 2008 Moments: Joe Biden’s Gesture to the Disabled

Obama, His Chief of Staff, and the Middle East (Part 2)

Who Will Be Advising Obama on Foreign Policy?

Russia to Obama: Ball’s In Your Court



----------------------

8 November 2008

Election Post-Mortems, the New Administration, and W

ELECTION AFTERMATH, POLITICS, AND A BIT OF FILM

Oliver Stone’s W: All You Need to Know

After Obama’s Victory: The Unseen Riots

Obama, His Chief of Staff, and the Middle East

Scott Lucas on the BBC World Service: What Now for the Republican Party?

From the Archives: Assessing the US Election

----------------------

7 November 2008

Your Grab-Bag of Post-Election Surprises

We're trying to get to grips with the US and the world after the confirmation of President-Elect Obama. Meanwhile, there is a buffet of surprises, best moments, and fallout from the 2008 election:

Blue State Iran

Great Post-Election Moments: The K-Hammer Gives History’s Verdict

Great Election Moments: The Genius who is Bill Kristol

Obama’s Surprise Number One Fan: Silvio Berlusconi

Obama’s State of the Union Message: An Advance Copy

Republican Blood-Letting: Knives Come Out for Palin

Reviving the Israel-Palestine Issue: Nader’s Letter to Obama

Race and the US Elections: Thumbs-Down for the BBC?

----------------------

6 November 2008

From Watching to Enduring America

Thanks to all who joined us throughout Election Night on Enduring America. We're continuing the move of the blog to the new site. Our post-election and international stories for the last 24 hours:

Where Now for the Republicans?

Irreverent Election Postscripts (2): Bush Avoids Going Down the Sewer

Irreverent Election Postscripts: America Overcomes “Crappiness”

Return to the World: The Stories We’re Watching

Today’s Mythical “Surge” Moment

When the Honeymoon is Over (Part 2)

----------------------

4 November 2008

Watching-Enduring the Election Throughout the Day (and Night)

We'll be covering Election Day all day and night on Enduring America, with a live blog beginning at 9 p.m. British Time (4 p.m. on the East Coast of the US) and updates, comments, and humourous glances up to then. Join us and offer your own projections, help us pick out an Election Night anthem, and express happiness/anger/frustration.

Meanwhile:

Enduring America's Final Projection: Obama 338, McCain 200

More than a dozen overnight polls have settled in a remarkably narrow range of a lead of about 7 points for Obama-Biden. If they are on the mark, Obama has not only checked McCain’s fight-back of the last week but has slightly widened his advantage.

In light of this national trend and — more importantly — early voting patterns and state polls, Enduring America is now putting Florida back in the Democratic camp.

plus

Worst Election 2008 Story: Obama Loses, Blacks Riot

Monday Night Update: Democratic Advantage in Florida?

Projections from "Canuckistan"

----------------------

3 November 2008

All The Election Talk:

Obama Victory, The Inside Story of the Palin Nomination

and Sarah Palin's Brief Encounter with "President Sarkozy"

----------------------

2 November 2008

48 Hours to Go: Despite Republican Scare Tactics, Obama Secure

It’s a sign of the new politics that 72 hours away from a computer offers not only an old-fashioned but distorted view of the Presidential campaign.

Relying in a Dublin flat on Sky News’s rolling Saturday morning news-loop, I could reduce the race to The Terminator Comes Out for McCain. That dramatic headline was followed by California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger rallying the GOP faithful, and probably more than a few star-spotters, with: “I played an action hero. But John McCain is a real American action hero.” (And, oh yes, Barack Obama is a girly-man, or something to that effect)

Like a DVD that will never eject, Arnie repeated the theatrics every 30 minutes. So did the Sky reporters, preferring screengrabs like “Lipstick Chicks for Palin” and keeping any meaningful analysis in check. For example, why didn’t Schwarzenegger come out in California weeks ago for Big John McCain instead of popping up as a last-minute guest in Ohio ? Could it be that the Governor, even in his second term, wasn’t going to risk his political image at home, linking himself for more than a moment with a struggling campaign? And what does it say for the Republicans when their Presidential candidate becomes no more than a flailing second-string actor — “Senator Obama is going to take more than a trillion dollars from you in taxes” — behind the star introducing him?

Most importantly, take note of the guide to political and property success: Location, Location, Location. The Republican star event was in Ohio , as Obama was whipping up the crowds in Indiana . Translation? While McCain was having to play for a must-win state for the GOP, his opponent had the luxury of trying to snare a swing state that is far from critical for Democratic hopes.

So, even in this analytic backwater, a bit of insight was possible. Sky kept trying to whip up the drama for its coverage — they have their own “White House” in Florida for Election Night! — with the headline reading that McCain was now slightly ahead in Indiana and Missouri . In this race, that’s the equivalent of a 90th-minute goal when you’re 4-0 down (or, for my brother-in-law, the 4th-quarter touchdown for the University of Georgia so it only lost 49-10 rather than 49-3 to arch-rvial Florida ).

Safe in cyber-land this morning, I can confirm: for all the Schwarzenegger-aided attempt at sound and fury, little has changed. McCain-Palin are still around seven points down (and no closer than four points in any poll) in their Hail Mary target of Pennsylvania . Meanwhile, here’s the checklist on the states, held by the Republicans in 2004, that the Democrats could take — Obama-Biden need only a maximum of three of these and, in some cases, one to get to the White House:

Florida : Democrats up 2.5

Ohio : Democrats up 5.1

Virginia : Democrats up 6.5

North Carolina : Democrats up 1.9

Indiana : Republicans up 0.2

Missouri : Democrats up 0.6

Colorado : Democrats up 7.0

Nevada : Democrats up 4.9

New Mexico : Democrats up 11.6

And that doesn’t even count the real surprises that have come into play: RealClearPolitics — which seems more intent than FiveThirtyEight on hedging its bets has added to the toss-up column McCain’s home state of Arizona to Montana, North Dakota, and Georgia (my devout Republican brother-in-law is having a very bad weekend) and has moved Arkansas — deep redneck Arkansas! — into the “leaning” rather than “solid” Republican category.

I think those new supposed battlegrounds are just a bit of bonus news for the Democrats. Indeed, I’m still playing the conservative hand of McCain-Palin holding Missouri , Indiana , and North Carolina . But that’s no change on Obama 338, Big John 200 in the final electoral count. (For what it’s worth, RealClearPolitics is tapping into Enduring America’s oracle powers — with the exception of giving North Carolina to Obama-Palin, it’s in line with this projection.)

Here’s the latest smoke signals of Republicans burning in desperation. Once their charge that Obama-Biden were Marxists was rebuffed by Barack’s classic, “According to Senator McCain, I must be a Communist because I shared my toys in kindergarten”, they reached for a last handful of mud with Obama-hangs-out-with-extremists. The bad guy in this scenario was Columbia University Professor Rashid Khalidi, author of numerous books on the Middle East and US foreign policy.

I’ve had the fortune of not only reading but listening to Khalidi’s academic presentations. He is engaging, challenging, and forthright. He is critical of US policy towards the Middle East and Washington ’s support for Israel . Twinning that with the fact that Khalidi is Palestinian to make the charge of “anti-Semitic” is a slur and no more.

However, even granting Khalidi as an imminent danger to mankind and thus making Obama — who has supported Khalidi’s work in Palestine — an appeaser of anti-Semitism, the Republican strategy has a couple of flaws. Such as forgetting that the International Republican Institute, led by one John McCain, gave more than $400,000 to Khalidi’s group. Such as putting up this McCain campaign worker to prove that Obama hung out with devoted enemies of Israel (hat-tip to Juan Cole)….

----------------------

30 October 2008

Election Talk: Socialists, Emerging Candidates, and "Wassup?"

We’re “in transition” to our new home for blogging and commentary, Enduring America. It gives us more freedom with layout, video, and interaction with readers. Featured today:

Obama Victory = Socialists on Your Doorstep

The 3rd Party Candidate Who May Deny McCain Victory

“Wassup?” How Obama Won Via the Internet

The Election Night Anchorman We’d Like to See: Lil O’Reilly

----------------------

30 October 2008

Election Projection: The Latest Reading of the Campaign

It appears some hearts are a-flutterin’ today at the prospect that the Presidential race on November 4 may not be over by bedtime on the East Coast of the US, let alone here in Britain. Four of the eight new national polls (Rasmussen, Gallup Traditional, IBD/TIPP, and GWU/Battleground), including two of the three with the largest samples, have Obama only up three points on McCain.

This quicker heartbeat isn’t just the symptom of a broadcast media hoping for more drama (and ratings) approching that of 2000 and 2004. Some colleagues, both in Britain and the US , are thinking that the Democrats — for all their spending and push for voter registration — haven’t solidified their voting base.

All the same, I have to be a bit of a party pooper. The issue is not that those “other” polls (including the Gallup Expanded, which is more likely than the Traditional to be relevant in a year of high voter turnout) have Obama with a steady 5-7 point lead. Let’s even set aside that FiveThirtyEight.com, comprehensive and by far the shrewdest assessor of what polls can and can’t indicate, has the gap still holding at just under 6 percent.

To paraphrase Brother Bill Clinton’s folks, it’s the states, stupid. And there is little movement towards McCain in the nine battleground states ( Florida , Ohio , North Carolina , Virginia , Indiana , Missouri , Colorado , New Mexico , Nevada ) that will decide this contest. Yes, he has closed to level-pegging with Obama in Missouri and he’s only 1 1/2 points out in Indiana . It’s a minor yes — even with Missouri and Indiana in his column, which we projected on Monday, the Republicans are more than 130 electoral votes adrift.

If anything, the unexpected shifts today are away from the Republicans. RealClearPolitics, for example, has excitedly moved Georgia — yep, the red-state Georgia where my relatives live — into the toss-up column. I hasten to add that the other top sites, including FiveThirtyEight, still have the Peach State firmly Republican — it appears that RCP has made its move because of one poll that has Obama down only a point and on the basis of strong early voting returns in Georgia in favour of the Democrats.

That last point is important, however, not necessarily for Georgia but for other states. FiveThirtyEight has noted an unprecedented early turnout. In the states of Louisiana , Georgia , and North Carolina , the early returns already exceed 2004 totals. And, just as important, that surge is favouring Obama.

The trend isn’t just at state level. In key counties in Ohio , the pivot state of 2004, early returns are two to three times the entire 2004 turnout. If Obama is performing as well in those returns as in the state, his lead would be more than enough to wipe out the narrow deficit that defeated John Kerry in Ohio in 2004.

That’s a big if, of course, as it assumes that all other things will be equal on Election Day. Of course, McCain could surprise me with an unexpected surge. Of course, there may be some truth to the legend of the “Bradley effect”, with declared Democratic voters suddenly turning Republican as they enter the voting booth.

But “may” doesn’t translate into likely. A friend sounded off earlier this evening that pollsters don’t seem to be mentioning “margin of error” in their reporting of samples — given that the margin for even a medium-sized poll is 3 percent either way, it could more than wipe out Obama’s putative lead in key states. It’s a fair point, but when you match up an accumulation of polls with readings of other factors from organisation to high voter registration for the Democrats to the early voting patterns, the case for an Obama victory — and an early victory — on 4 November continues to be close to open-and-shut.

----------------------

28 October 2008

Election Talk: The Campaign and The Races in the Senate

States of Play

To paraphrase Saturday Night Live’s classic 1970s sketch on General Francisco Franco, “The McCain-Palin campaign is stubbornly clinging to death.”

There are no significant shifts in likely state outcomes from Monday. RealClearPolitics has only two changes. New Hampshire is back in play, i.e., “leaning” rather than “solid” Democratics, primarily on the basis of two polls that have Obama only 4-5 points up vs. previous readings of 7-15 points. The problem here is that, in such a small state, polling samples can be quite volatile. Even if New Hampshire is now up for grabs, with 4 electoral votes, it’s not a key player despite all the “as New Hampshire goes, so goes the United States ” clichés.

Much more fun is Arizona --- that’s right, Big John’s home patch --- moving into “leaning” rather than “solid” Republican. It’s a mirror image of New Hampshire , with a 21-point poll gap suddenly coming down to 5-8. Again, I don’t think the state will shift on 4 November although, as FiveThirtyEight shrewdly notes, the spillover effect from Obama’s rally in Arizona is that it bolsters his position in neighbouring New Mexico .

No changes on FiveThirtyEight, which keeps both Arizona and New Hampshire safe for the respective favourites. Reading the state polls, however, they now have McCain down to a 3% chance of triumphing on Election Day.

Just for Comparison

In case you’re suspicious of a pro-Obama bias here, Watching America is a bit more cautious on his prospects than either FiveThirtyEight or RealClearPolitics. Our 338-200 prediction matches up with 351-187 on FiveThirtyEight and an Obama landslide of 375-163 on RCP.

Turning to Congress

We’ll try and do a full run-down on both the Senate and House before next Tuesday, particularly as they have been largely overlooked by the British media (Anne Applebaum’s column in the Daily Telegraph is today’s exception).

Here’s a snapshot of a quite interesting year for Senate contests, which features a convicted felon (Republican Ted Stevens of Alaska, found guilty yesterday on seven counts of violating Federal ethics laws), a comedian/best-selling writer (Democrat Al Franken of Minnesota), former Cabinet member (Republican Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina), and several long-serving Republicans in the fights of their electoral lives.

The current Senate is balanced at 49-49 between the two parties, although the Independents Joseph Lieberman and Bernie Sanders are with the Democratic Caucus (in the case of Lieberman, very “technically” with the Democratic Caucus). However, with the “Bush effect” kicking in big-time, an Election Day bonanza for the Democrats is possible.

There are 35 races this year (because of the six-year term of Senators, only one-third come back to the voters in every two-year electoral cycle). The 2002 success of the Republicans now turns against them, as only 12 of the seats are held by Democrats. More importantly, all of those Democratic seats are safe.

In contrast, no less than eleven of the Republican seats are now vulnerable, including --- in a late turnaround at the polls --- that of the Republican leader in the Senate, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky. In a country where an incumbent Senator used to be only at risk if he is found naked in a park, is outed by his mistress, or “does a Stevens” and gets jail time, this level of vulnerability is extraordinary.

This, however, is no ordinary year. In three of the Republican seats, the incumbent is not standing. Those can be handed to the Democrats (Mark Warner in Virginia, Mark Udall in Colorado , Tom Udall in New Mexico ) right now. In New Hampshire, incumbent Republican John Sununu has been trailing former Governor Jeanne Shaheen by about nine points In Oregon, incumbent Republican Gordon Smith is trying to claw back a four-point deficit to Jeff Merkley with a clever tactic: he’s claiming common ground with Barack Obama in the hope that Oregonians, who lead the nation in their disapproval of George W. Bush, will see him as a bridge-builder with the next President.

Three other seats should have been safe Republican holds but, in the last few weeks, have suddenly turned into real electoral races. Roger Wicker is down to a 1-2 point lead in some polls in Mississippi . Saxby Chambliss in Georgia , who got into the Senate in 2002 thanks to an atrocious smear campaign by Bush’s political spinners against the Vietnam veteran Max Cleland, is only two points up. And Republican Senate leader McConnell now finds he is only a couple of points ahead in Kentucky . It makes for interesting viewing (and, for partisan Democrats, hopes of a night comparable to the 1997 Labour thrashing of the Tories in Britain ), but all three races should stay with the Republicans.

That leaves three Senate races in the balance. In a race which, for politicos with no other life, has been fascinating train-wreck viewing, Elizabeth Dole in North Carolina has been tumbling against Kay Hagan --- she’s now two points down and can be marked as the underdog. In Alaska, Felon Ted Stevens is now one point behind Mark Begich --- FiveThirtyEight is confident that the Democrats will take the seat but Stevens now only has the look and morals but also the rising-from-the-dead quality of a vampire.

Last but definitely not least, in the race which may capture the essence of the last seven Bush years, Al Franken --- Saturday Night Live member and author of books such “Rush Limbaugh is a Big Fat Idiot” and “Lies and the Liars Who Tell Them” --- has come from way back to a realistic shot of unseating Republican Norm Coleman, best known for getting his political backside handed to him when he questioned George Galloway over Iraq. This seat was held by the Democrat Paul Wellstone, one of the finest persons ever to serve in Congress, until he died just before the 2002 election, so it has a special resonance for activists.

How do the numbers work out? At a maximum, the Democrats will be up 60-38 (with two Independents) in the new Senate but a more realistic “high hope” is a 57-41 split (if Hagan, Begich, and Franken triumph).

In practical terms, that isn’t an overwhelming turn of fortunes in the Congress. The media’s one grasp of this is that the Democrats get a “lock” on the Senate if they have 60 seats, as they can prevent another Republican filibuster to block legislation. That, however, is a relatively minor consideration, testimony less to political reality than to the fact that Jimmy Stewart and the movie Mr Smith Goes to Washington still defines the Congress for some onlookers. What is clear, however, is that the Democrats don’t need Joe Lieberman anymore to ensure a majority. So they solidify their hold on Committee chairmanships and key posts.

More importantly, a gain of eight seats for the Democrats will be a powerful symbol in its own right, complementing that of an Obama Change. After close to a generation of supposed defining of American values by the Republicans --- from Ronald Reagan to little Bush --- the other party has the chance to take responsibility. Whether it does, in a meaningful rather than rhetorical way, will do a lot to answer the question of “What is America ?” for those of us outside the United States .





----------------------

27 October 2008

Your State-by-State Snapshot of the 2008 Election

Eight mornings to go before Indecision Day, as the Daily Show would call it, and last week’s analysis (Watching America, 23 October) is holding up well. There might well be a party on 4 November but there won’t be much drama.

Surprisingly --- well, surprising to me because it seems to be a forlorn strategy --- the media line that McCain-Palin were going to gamble on turning Pennsylvania Republican seems to have borne out over the weekend. Unsurprisingly, the Democrats countered by upping their presence in the state, with Obama attending rallies in Pittsburgh and the Pennsylvania suburbs this week. Obama-Biden are still up between 11 and 13 points in the latest state polls.

The more important story, picked up by the New York Times this AM, is the desperate attempt of the Republicans to hold onto “their” states from 2004: “Mr. McCain and his running mate, Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska, are planning to spend most of their time in Florida, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, Missouri, and Indiana.” That’s significant because those are six of the 10 Republican-held swing states that we identified on Thursday. What’s even more significant is that even a Republican miracle in these states won’t be enough: there’s an indication here that the Republicans don’t have the resources to defend Colorado , New Mexico , and Nevada --- a Democratic victory in Colorado plus one of the other two means a President Obama (barring a surprise McCain win in Pennsylvania ).

The broader weekend spin was McCain’s Braveheart call to his troops, insisting, “We’re going to win” and claiming that Obama and Co. are already treating the election as won. It’s a shrewd if expected move, trying to win over floating voters with the impression of an overconfident, even arrogant Democratic campaign. However, in the equally shrewd and expected counter-move, the Democrats are putting out the message that “it ain’t over until it’s over” and no one should expect an easy walk to the White House.

My reading is that McCain will close the national gap slightly over the next week. Underdogs often do so in the last phase of a campaign (Ford v. Carter ’76, Bush v. Clinton ’92 as examples). That will be a token gain, however --- McCain may cling on to a couple of states where he’s slightly behind, but there is no way that he pulls out the “Hail Mary” of modern US politics and takes himself and the Hockey Mom to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

I won’t be putting my final picks into the office pools until next Monday, but here’s a snapshot of the likely scenario. Remember that 270 electoral votes are needed for victory.

SAFE DEMOCRATIC STATES (20 and Washington D.C --- 259 electoral votes): I won’t list them all but this includes Michigan , Minnesota , and Wisconsin , where the Republicans had hopes of wins, and…

Pennsylvania (21 votes): Sorry, Big John. There’s not much hope in the appeal to that mythical working-class, white multitude in “western Pennsylvania ” to come out in force to stop Obama. Any bump in those areas will be more than offset by big Democratic margins in the urban areas.

SAFE REPUBLICAN STATES (19 --- 157 electoral votes): The fragment of good news for the GOP is that Georgia and West Virginia , which should never have been in doubt, have been shored up in recent days. The fun story, if it’s borne out in the next week, is that Obama is closing the gap in McCain’s home state of Arizona, but I think that’s just a bit of electoral froth and mischief.

THE 11 STATES IN PLAY (122 electoral votes): From largest to smallest…

Florida (27 votes): Obama’s up by just over two points here, a margin which could easily be overturned by the Republicans. Normally I would expect the diehard GOP folks to bring this back to McCain-Palin but memories of 2000 are a force here. The Democrats will want Florida big-time not only to lock down the election but as in-your-face statement to those they think took the Presidency from them eight years ago. A nail-biter but…

Obama-Biden

Ohio (20 votes): Obama’s up 4-6 points and the 2000/2004 “bump” is in play here as well. This was the decisive state four years ago and, discounting the theory that is still about that the Republicans stole the state, the Democrats think they should have made sure of the Buckeye State last time. This time…

Obama-Biden

North Carolina (15 votes): Obama’s up a point in the polls. This is one of those places where I expect a late Republican push to make a difference --- a big turnout in the rural areas may make a difference. Remember, this used to be the state of the late Jesse Helms, the spectre of parochial, xenophobic Republicanism.

McCain-Palin

Virginia (13 votes): Looking back on it, maybe the key state in this campaign. Republican for the last generation but, with its mix of rural areas and affluent suburbs, increasingly up for grabs --- in contrast to North Carolina to the south, not as definable in working-class, white terms. Swung early in the campaign towards the Democrats and Obama’s now up 6-7 points.

Obama-Biden

Missouri (11 votes): See North Carolina --- Obama’s up a point but McCain’s small bounce-back this week may take this one back into the Republican column. Still, I wouldn’t put the house --- or even my children --- on the outcome here.

McCain-Palin

Indiana (11 votes): The first vote to watch on Election Night, as it reports back just after 10 p.m. British time. If it goes for Obama, Democrat parties can already swing. Obama’s lead is whisker-thin, though. This state was such a Republican lock in 2000 and 2004 that, disappointing my colleague “Canuckistan”, have to call it…

McCain-Palin

Colorado (9 votes): Obama up 6-7 points. In a state balanced between big-city liberals, Christian fire-breathers, and rural whites, it’s the liberals who have been better-organised. No surprise that Obama made an appearance in Denver this week to get the party started.

Obama-Biden

New Mexico (5 votes): Obama has steadily gained in the last month, turning a toss-up into an 8-9 point lead. Somebody sometime is going to figure out the US Southwest has never been a die-hard “ Red State ” area, particularly with Hispanic voters drifting away from the Republicans.

Obama-Biden

Nevada (5 votes): The real surprise for those of us who have always lumped it with arch-conservative Utah . Enough swing voters --- by class and education, if not race --- to make this possible hunting ground for the Democrats. The local organization has converted the opportunity --- Obama’s up 2-3 points.

Obama-Biden

North Dakota and Montana (3 votes each): Should never have been in doubt. Even listing them here is a sign of how McCain-Palin have crumbled since early October.

McCain-Palin

YOUR ELECTION NIGHT OUTCOME (MAYBE)

Obama-Biden 338

McCain-Palin 200

----------------------

25 October 2008

Grand Delusions: From McCain’s Defeat to “Victory” in Iraq

Amidst this week’s rationalizations by numerous Republicans of John McCain’s forthcoming defeat, one in particular is especially tragic. Michael Gerson, who once wrote speeches for President George W. Bush, explains that McCain will lose the election because he --- and Gerson --- were right about the surge in Iraq whereas Barack Obama is completely wrong.

Forget, for the moment, that Gerson’s explanation ignores what happened in Iraq between 2003 and 2007 in the aftermath of the war he supported. Gerson is flat-out wrong on what is happening in Iraq , wrong not only in description but in what is likely to happen in Iraq in forthcoming months.

Listen to podcast…

----------------------

23 October

Tales from the Presidential Campaign

Election Talk: The Republican Alamo

Some Republicans were talking up a slight bump in the polls this weekend for McCain-Palin --- translation: instead of being 5-6 points down in national surveys, they were "only" 4-5 points down.

FiveThirtyEight.com, excellent as always, put this in perspective by noting that to overhaul Obama, McCain would have to keep picking up a half-point each day, every day to the election. There's a more important point, however: at this point, it's not a question of the national poll but the numbers in each "swing" state.

So, to get to the nitty-gritty, McCain's limited national gain plays out at state level with a movement back to him in places like West Virginia and Indiana, which now lean back to the Republicans. These states, however, should never have been in question --- at least in any scenario where the GOP has a chance of winning --- they should have been "safe". So, to be blunt, McCain is only clawing back a bit of his lost territory.

Contrast this with the important "swing" areas. McCain-Palin - in my humble opinion - have no hope of taking any state that went Democratic in 2004. In three states which were seen as possible Republican gains only a month ago --- Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota -- Obama is up 10-12 points in polling.

That means McCain has to hold all but two (and possibly all but one) states that Bush took four years ago. But in eight of these, McCain is trailing by a clear margin in three (Virginia, Colorado, New Mexico) and down 2-4 points in five (Missouri, North Carolina, Nevada, Florida, and Ohio). And this doesn't even include Indiana and, bizarrely, North Dakota which could still be in play.

The media line over the last 48 hours is that the Republicans may make a last grandstand effort by throwing resources into Pennsylvania to pray that state away from the Democrats. If true, this is either desperation or mad genius, as Obama is up 11 points in latest polling.

More likely is the scenario that the Republicans are going to the Alamo - a last, frantic defense to keep the eight states listed above. But there are tales that they have given up on Colorado, which means it comes down to clinging onto the other seven.

Possible? In a politics of "never say never", sure. But you do know what happened to the defenders of the Alamo.

Election Talk: The Backfire of the Culture Wars

The immediate furour over Colin Powell's weekend endorsement of Barack Obama missed a key dimension of the reasons for his decision. The issue was not just Obama's "proving himself" or, conversely, the inexperience and weaknesses of Sarah Palin but the Republican strategy of pitting "good Americans" against others:

Now, I understand what politics is all about. I know how you can go after one another, and that's good. But I think this goes too far....I'm also troubled by, not what Senator McCain says, but what members of the party say. And it is permitted to be said such things as, "Well, you know that Mr. Obama is a Muslim." Well, the correct answer is, he is not a Muslim, he's a Christian. He's always been a Christian. But the really right answer is, what if he is? Is there something wrong with being a Muslim in this country? The answer's no, that's not America. Is there something wrong with some seven-year-old Muslim-American kid believing that he or she could be president? Yet, I have heard senior members of my own party drop the suggestion, "He's a Muslim and he might be associated terrorists." This is not the way we should be doing it in America.

I feel strongly about this particular point because of a picture I saw in a magazine. It was a photo essay about troops who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. And one picture at the tail end of this photo essay was of a mother in Arlington Cemetery, and she had her head on the headstone of her son's grave. And as the picture focused in, you could see the writing on the headstone. And it gave his awards--Purple Heart, Bronze Star--showed that he died in Iraq, gave his date of birth, date of death. He was 20 years old. And then, at the very top of the headstone, it didn't have a Christian cross, it didn't have the Star of David, it had crescent and a star of the Islamic faith. And his name was Kareem Rashad Sultan Khan, and he was an American. He was born in New Jersey. He was 14 years old at the time of 9/11, and he waited until he can go serve his country, and he gave his life.

I still Powell has a lot to answer for, notably his failure to stand up to others in the Bush Administration and stop the mad quest for executive power and a war in Iraq, but I think his words should be a prominent reply to the political poison of "us" v. "them", a poison which has not only threatened electoral politics but wreaked havoc in the name of US foreign policy.

And there are other encouraging signs. Sarah Palin has finally apologised -- well, kind of - for her praise of "pro-American" parts of the United States (presumably those favouring the Republicans) and implication that other areas were just a bit suspect. Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann's call for her colleagues to be investigated and classifed by the media as "pro-American" and "anti-American" has given a boost to her opponent both in finances and polling.

American fingers crossed that this continues.

Election Talk: McCain's Fightback --- An Unexpected Endorsement

"Al-Qaeda will have to support McCain in the coming election," said a commentary posted Monday on the extremist Web site al-Hesbah, which is closely linked to the terrorist group. It said the Arizona Republican would continue the "failing march of his predecessor," President Bush.

----------------------

21 October

Tuesday Buffet: Obama, Khomeini, and the Chavez-McDonald's War

A Footnote to the Election Talk: The Sublime....

I neglected to say in Monday's Buffet that, in contrast to some of the media witterings over the Colin Powell endorsement, Juan Cole's detailed reading is almost as effective as the former Secretary of State's simultaneous promotion of the Democrats and demolition of McCain-Palin.

A reader, noting the Cole column, helpfully adds that Powell's endorsement is just as valuable in offsetting Obama's supposed weaknesses, namely, his lack of foreign policy experience, as it is in pushing Obama's positives to uncommitted voters.

And The Ridiculous: Barack Obama --- The Next Ayatollah Khomeini

A reader points us to Baron Boddissey's Islam-bashing website Gates of Vienna. There you can find this masterpiece, "Understanding Obama: The Making of a Fuehrer":

I must confess I was not impressed by Sen. Barack Obama from the first time I saw him. At first I was It is surreal to see the level of hysteria in his admirers. This phenomenon is unprecedented in American politics. Women scream and swoon during his speeches. They yell and shout to Obama, “I love you.” Never did George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt. Martin Luther King Jr. or Ronald Reagan arouse so much raw emotion. Despite their achievements, none of them was raised to the rank of Messiah. The Illinois senator has no history of service to the country. He has done nothing outstanding except giving promises of change and hyping his audience with hope. It’s only his words, not his achievements that is causing this much uproar.



When cheering for someone turns into adulation, something is wrong. Excessive adulation is indicative of a personality cult....During 1979, when the Iranians were tired of the dictatorial regime of the late Shah, they embraced Khomeini, not because they wanted Islam, but because he promised them change. The word in the street was, “anything is better than the Shah.” They found their error when it was too late....

Listening to Obama… it harkens back to when I was younger and I used to watch Khomeini, how he would excite the crowd and they’d come to their feet and scream and yell.



And the Surreal: "I Can See Russia in My Name"

"Publius" notes Monday's story in The Times of London, "I Can Live with Defeat, Says McCain", and comments, "In the guise of America's "who cares who came second", to talk about defeat tells me his internal polling is really bad news." Sprinkling a bit of salt on the wound, he takes on McCain's declaration that " Mr Obama was seeking to buy the election with his massive fundraising and spending " with the rejoinder, "The chutzpah of 'Obama's buying the election' when McCain did not avail himself of McCain-Feingold, the law [on campaign finance reform that] he championed, is just too much."

However, it is Publius's afterthought that concerns me, either for his well-being or that of America under GOP leadership: "If the name of McCain's VP is spelled S. Palin, try removing the P and inserting a T."

Saying the Unsayable? The US and Iran

Flynt Leverett, who handled Middle Eastern affairs for the National Security Council, and Hillary Mann Leverett, a National Security Council staffer who was involved in the "unofficial" dialogue with Iran over Afghanistan between 2001 and 2003, propose a US-Iranian "Grand Bargain". Contending that "as a result of a dysfunctional Iran policy, among other foreign policy blunders, the American position in the region is currently under greater strain than at any point since the end of the Cold War", they argue: It is clearly time for a fundamental change of course in the U.S. approach to the Islamic Republic. By fundamental change, we do not mean incremental, step-by-step engagement with Tehran, or simply trying to manage the Iranian challenge in the region more adroitly than the Bush administration has done. Rather, we mean the pursuit of thoroughgoing strategic rapprochement between the two nations.

Update: Hugo Chavez v. Ronald McDonald

A reader from Alabama offers this nostalgic reflection on the Venezuelan Government's temporary shutdown of McDonald's outlets:

In 1989 there was a general strike in Venezuela. Really eerie to have the entire city absolutely silent on a weekday -- the only traffic were occasional security vehicles. I played city editor from home because we were allowed only a certain number of workers -- two reporters and photographers or something like that -- until after daytime working hours.



McDonald's and, I believe, certain banks were just about the only ones to remain open in defiance of the strike. The banks I understood because of bankers' political beliefs, but McDonald's wasn't making any friends. Remember, though, that McDonald's at least then was a relatively pricey meal there.



Goon squads ... er, labor committees made sure people stayed closed and ended up at one of the McD's in Caracas. A garbage can ended up going through the plate glass and, by the end of the day, there was a tank and soldiers in the parking lot protecting the restaurant. Very weird.



McD's in Caracas, unlike Burger King or Tropi Burger, was different than your normal fast-food experience. It always was spotless, the food fast and fresh. And the wholesome kids who worked there -- it was like stepping into a television ad! You expected them to break out into song. Clearly, pay must have been decent and upwardly mobile student-types were their main counter help (janitorial, of course, was another story). They were probably all the Venezuelan equivalent of the College Republican Club and the Future Business Leaders of America.



Anyway, McDonald's always was crowded. Before and after the strike.

----------------------

20 October

Monday Buffet: From the US Elections to New Old Cold Wars

A General's Endorsement I must admit Colin Powell's ringing call, made on the flagship Sunday TV programme Meet the Press, surprised me. I was particularly shocked by his remark, "I was...concerned at the selection of Governor Palin....Now that we have had a chance to watch her for some seven weeks, I don't believe she's ready to be president of the United States." However, Watching America can now reveal the reason behind the former Secretary of State's decision to back Obama. Last week Powell appeared with Palin on the legendary US game show "The $800 Billion (formerly $25,000) Pyramid". Watching America has obtained an exclusive clip. Funtime with Colin This morning's Today programme on BBC radio added a needed giggle to the serious political events. First, just after 6 a.m., our favourite US correspondent Justin Webb offered the insight that Powell's endorsement might be "marginal" because many right-wing Republicans distrusted the former General and added that many Democrats who opposed the Iraq War might not be persuaded because of Powell's role in the Bush Administration. Well done, Justin! Right-wing Republicans wouldn't vote for Obama-Biden if Todd Palin, George W. Bush, and the Lord Jesus endorsed the Democrats, and any anti-war Democrat is highly unlikely to be backing the GOP. The groups to watch, of course, are moderate Republicans who are unhappy with their Presidential ticket and the sizeable group of "independent" voters who will likely be decisive in this contest. The anchor of Today, James Naughtie, righted the BBC ship with an entertaining grilling of Emily Walker, a Republican spokeswoman who gave a dismissive wave of her hand to Powell's statement. She explained that his words "would not change the direction of this campaign". Quite right --- as Naughtie pointed out in a subsequent question, the polls are always running away from the Republicans. President Obama: Will It Make a Difference? Readers have pointed Watching America to two excellent but divergent views of the next Administration. Mark Danner seizes optimism from the last eight years of despair, "It is the very unpopularity of Bush and the atmosphere of profound disillusion and crisis that helped produce a Democratic challenger whose election—however remarkable his talents, however stirring his eloquence, however bright his promise—would constitute a true revolution." Mike Davis, however, worries that the Obama team may just follow its predecessor into the abyss: "It is bitterly ironic, but, I suppose, historically predictable that a presidential campaign millions of voters have supported for its promise to end the war in Iraq has now mortgaged itself to a "tougher than McCain" escalation of a hopeless conflict in Afghanistan and the Pakistani tribal frontier. In the best of outcomes, the Democrats will merely trade one brutal, losing war for another. In the worst case, their failed policies may set the stage for the return of Cheney and Rove, or their even more sinister avatars." It's the New Old Cold War (Chapter 438) Far from content with several Wars on Terror/Iraq/Afghanistan, Strategic Forecasting reaches back for an earlier Battle to the End of Time. (This, of course, is entirely unconnected from the suspicision that Stratfor tries to pick at least $99 a year from your pocket by making you very, very worried.) Conveniently re-framing the link of Saddam Hussein to terrorism, Reva Bhalla puts the Kremlin in the seat of Master Planner Wanting to Kill All of Us: "The potential revival of Russian state-sponsored terrorism is most likely still early in its development. But one should not forget that after the Cold War, many experts proclaimed a 'New World Order' in which terrorism had become a thing of the past — and U.S. intelligence capabilities atrophied as a result. About a decade later, the 9/11 attacks caught the United States off guard and brought into being a new era of Islamist terrorism that is only now declining. With state-sponsored terrorism back on the horizon, the time has come to recognize the changing face of terrorism beyond the post-9/11 world." Mentioning Bhalla's analysis is a convenient way to welcome back our old friend John Bolton, who is also finding solace --- amidst the "appeasement" of Iran, North Korea, Venezuela, etc. --- in a new old campaign: "Ultimately, what most risks "provoking" Moscow is not Western resolve but Western weakness. This is where the real weight of history lies. Accordingly, attitude adjustment in Moscow first requires attitude adjustment in NATO capitals, and quickly, before Moscow's swaggering leaders draw the wrong lessons from their recent successes....Such an approach will not endanger Western security but enhance it. And if Russia takes offense, better to know that now than later, when the stakes for all concerned may be much higher."

----------------------

17 October

Friday Buffet: From the Campaign Trail to Iraq

PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION WATCH-LIST

Four Signs That This Race is Over

1. Joe the Plumber Goes Down the Drain

On Wednesday night, John McCain's economic shtick was that he was the President who would look out for "Joe the Plumber", a working-class fella from Ohio who apparently would not be able to buy his business under Barack Obama's tax proposals. JoeWurzelbacher instantly became the newest celebrity of Campaign 2008.

Unfortunately for McCain, the New York Times became more than a fan:

Mr. Wurzelbacher had never held a plumber’s license, which is required in Toledo and several surrounding municipalities.... His full name is Samuel J. Wurzelbacher. And he owes back taxes, too, public records show. The premise of his complaint to Mr. Obama about taxes may also be flawed, according to tax analysts. Contrary to what Mr. Wurzelbacher asserted and Mr. McCain echoed, neither his personal taxes nor those of the business where he works are likely to rise if Mr. Obama’s tax plan were to go into effect, they said. [OTHER FAMOUS JOES WHO COULD SAVE MCCAIN: Joe Pesci, Joe Louis, Joe and the Volcano, Joe Mama, Joe 90, and (hat tip to Liam Kennedy) Joe Soap] 2. One Last Wild Cultural Swing Following on from the "Culture Wars" theme: FiveThirtyEight.com took the line, immediately after the debate, that McCain lost his early advantage in the debate when he took a pop at Congressman John Lewis of Georgia. A man I admire and respect -- I've written about him -- Congressman John Lewis, an American hero, made allegations that Sarah Palin and I were somehow associated with the worst chapter in American history, segregation, deaths of children in church bombings, George Wallace. That, to me, was so hurtful. And, Senator Obama, you didn't repudiate those remarks. So, the issue is not that the McCain-Palin rhetoric with their question, "Who is Barack Obama?" and the answer, "Palling around with terrorists....This is not a man who sees America like you and I see America,”, was prompting crowd responses of "traitor" and "terrorist...kill him". Instead, it's Big John who is the victim? Hmmm.... Here's what Lewis, one of the leaders of the 1960s Civil Rights Movement, actually wrote: What I am seeing reminds me too much of another destructive period in American history. Sen. McCain and Gov. Palin are sowing the seeds of hatred and division, and there is no need for this hostility in our political discourse."



George Wallace [segregationist Governor of Alabama and Presidential candidate in 1968 and 1972] never threw a bomb. He never fired a gun, but he created the climate and the conditions that encouraged vicious attacks against innocent Americans who were simply trying to exercise

their constitutional rights. Because of this atmosphere of hate, four little girls were killed on Sunday morning when a church was bombed in Birmingham, Alabama. Well, the way I read it, Lewis was not accusing McCain and Palin of the crimes of the 1960s. Instead, he was warning that character attacks on Obama with the clear message that he is "un-American" and the (unstated) reminder that he is a black un-American are not exactly conductive to good-neighbourly relations . If the language was over the political line (and the Obama campaign quickly pointed this out), Lewis' allegation doesn't stand up to the Republicans' own guilt-by-association tactics. It's not my reading that matters, however, but the reaction of the American public. And, judging by the hysteria coming from Charles Krauthammer in the Washington Post, the GOP's last cultural gambit --- please vote for us because we've been terribly wronged --- has failed. 2A. One Last Wild Cultural Swing --- UPDATE Charles Krauthammer fades away screaming as Saturday Night Live features "the crazy McCain-Palin Rally Lady".

3. The First Swallows of the Electoral Autumn Leave aside the snap polls that showed --- even on Fox --- Obama "winning" the debate by a 2:1 margin amongst undecideds. FiveThirtyEight.com has some dramatic numbers on Obama's margins in five states allowing early voting: % Voting Early Margin amongst Early Voters Margin in Polls New Mexico 10% Obama +23% Obama +6%

Ohio 12% Obama +18% Obama +4%

Georgia 18% Obama +6% McCain +11%

Iowa 14% Obama +34% Obama +10%

North Carolina 5% Obama +34% McCain +5% Even if you pop a couple of grains of salt on these numbers, say, that pro-Obama folks are quicker to get to the mailbox, Obama's lead --- even in what should be "safe" Republican state of Georgia and North Carolina, which McCain has to win to have any hope --- is ominous if you're a Big John backer. 4. Crossing to the Other Side The Times of London --- that's right, the staunch defender of Thatcherism in the 1980s, flagship newspaper of Rupert Murdoch --- endorses Obama. (By the way, so did the Washington Post.)

A Necessary Correction

JM writes from London:

"As a fervent reader of your Journal, I must complain about the glaring omission in the Sarah Palin Flowchart (Watching America, 16 October). You forgot THE WINK that tells the fellow travellers that 'I've got this one right' and the rest of us, 'What am I doing here?'"

Happy to set the record straight, JM. Consider the flowchart amended with a special SP wink aimed straight at you.

TODAY'S IRAQ CELEBRATIONS

Michael Gerson, former Bush speechwriter (and thus one of the scribblers behind the American adventure in Iraq), is the latest columnist to give General/King David Petraeus a big kiss:

Petraeus may be uniquely capable of convincing our friends in the region of America's long-term commitment, precisely because he didn't leave Iraq to its fate -- because he is the man who stayed.

In the Times of London, Richard Beeston has the classic line, " Without the distractions of the bombings and shootings, it is easier to see Iraq for what it really is." Which is bit like asking, "Apart from the shooting, Mrs Lincoln, how did you like the play?"

Meanwhile...

----------------------

16 October

Nostalgia: Your Cut-Out-and-Keep Sarah Palin Debate Flowchart

----------------------

16 October

US Presidential Debate: The Anti-Climax

There was a 3rd presidential debate between Barack Obama and John McCain last night. And, before that, there was the Main Event.

My thanks to Steve Hewitt, who organised the Election Roundtable at the University of Birmingham yesterday, and to David Dunn and Mark McClelland, who joined me on the panel. It was 90 minutes of wide-ranging discussion --- fun, sometimes sparky, and I thought informative --- which covered not only the campaign but also what might come next with a President Obama or a President McCain.

The consensus was that it would be a President Obama. Everyone agreed that the key moment in the campaign was the emergence of the economic crisis, although one of us held out the prospect that --- with a stabilised stock market --- McCain might be able to rebound with attention on Obama's weaknesses and an appeal to the American middle ground. What was of more interest to me, however, at least with respect to what happens up to 4 November, was discussion of the role of "culture wars" in this election. I hasten to add that doesn't mean a return to the hallowed Hockey Mom ground of Sarah Palin, who barely made an appearance in the discussion. Instead, it was a lively consideration of whether the Republicans' invocation of a battle against extremism, elitism and liberalism, including (clearly stated) shadings of "working class" and (unstated) shadings of race, had been and would be of significance in the next three weeks.

I have to admit that I played sceptic in these exchanges, repeating my line that in this economic situation "Green Trumps Black and White". And, with apologies to the audience and panellists, I lost my cool when the discussion turned to whether it was legitimate for McCain to tag Obama as an extremist because of his association with his former pastor, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, who was featured earlier this year for his "anti-American" views,

Those exchanges were illuminating, however. It's not just a case of whether "culture wars" lose their impact when people are more worried about their mortgages and jobs. On concrete issues of culture, let's say, that of same-sex relationships, I don't see the political mileage in promoting conflict. For all the polarising effects of talk radio and outlets like Fox News, I think in much of America there is a live-and-let-live tolerance that was not evident even a decade ago. Note, for example, that McCain-Palin haven't pushed hard on issues like abortion, stem-cell research, and immigration. The advantage of shoring up their electoral base is likely to be outweighed by losing voters in the "center". Instead, the culture war is an abstract one against bogeymen of a leftist media, do-gooder community organisers, former terrorists, the (unstated) dangerous blacks, and foreigners.

This aspect of the Roundtable came back to me this morning when reflecting on the McCain-Obama debate. The media headline is that an "aggressive" McCain went after an Obama who tried to appear in control and "presidential". Fair enough, but McCain's aggression on the culture issue was staged to the point of half-heartedness. He had to be invited by the moderator to go after Obama's alleged dangerous associations, for example, with former Weather Underground member/current academic and community organiser Wiliam Ayers. Even then, he hesitated. It was only a couple of minutes later that he seemed to think, "I better have a go," and came out with this:

Yes, real quick. Mr. Ayers, I don't care about an old washed-up terrorist. But as Senator Clinton said in her debates with you, we need to know the full extent of that relationship.

We need to know the full extent of Senator Obama's relationship with ACORN, who is now on the verge of maybe perpetrating one of the greatest frauds in voter history in this country,maybe destroying the fabric of democracy. The same front outfit organization that your campaign gave $832,000 for "lighting and site selection." So all of these things need to be examined, of course.

Desperation doesn't begin to capture McCain's stab into the dangerous dark. One last go at tying Obama to "terrorism" is followed by a more detailed reference to a community organisation which has been pursuing voter registration --- inevitably, given its community position, of folks more likely to vote for the Democrats than the Republicans. Even if most, or even some, Americans have enough knowledge of ACORN to care, it's a weak allegation. As happens with most registration efforts, there are registrations of false names, for example, because of canvassers who get paid per voter and thus pad their lists. Few of these false names translate into "fake" voters who make it into the booths on Election Day (a fact backed up by the non-appearance of these false names in early voting in several states). The headline in the Independent of London pretty much summed up that last Republican tactic: "Obama Stretches Poll Lead as Mickey Mouse Joins Fray".

(And I've got to add this. For Republicans to be clinging to voter-padding and election-jiggling tactics after 2000 is pot frantically painting kettle black.)

What is intriguing that McCain's attempt seems to have flopped miserably. CNN's focus group of undecideds turned their dials to "negative" during the passage, and the exit polls --- to the extent that they can be trusted --- indicate that Obama outperformed Big John, especially amongst "floating" voters.

Which, I think, puts this debate into the category of Anti-Climax rather than Surprise Twist. And, as folks noted yesterday, that means the huge questions are not what happens before 4 November but afterwards. More on that in days to come....





----------------------

15 October

Lest We Forget: The Bush Administration and Torture

From this morning's Washington Post: "The Bush administration issued a pair of secret memos to the CIA in 2003 and 2004 that explicitly endorsed the agency's use of interrogation techniques such as waterboarding against al-Qaeda suspects -- documents prompted by worries among intelligence officials about a possible backlash if details of the program became public."

Joby Warrick's front-page story offers a narrative of how an Administration --- all high-level members of the Administration, including the President --- sanctioned torture. Not only did they sanction it, they did so repeatedly. Justice Department lawyers such as John Yoo provided the "legal" rationale in 2002. The subsequent memoranda were produced because of the worries of Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet that his officers were still exposed, either to criminal prosecution or as scapegoats for the Administration, if the programmes of "coercive interrogation" were exposed. Tenet's second request for legal cover came in June 2004, two months after the disclosure of the abuses of detainees at Abu Ghraib in Iraq.

Warrick's article, however, is far from original in its disclosures. Indeed, the reporter leaves out key details. By coincidence, yesterday I was reading the section in Barton Gellman's Angler disclosing the key official behind the authorisation for torture: Vice President Dick Cheney. Within days of 9-11, Cheney --- primarily through his assistant David Addington --- was seeking the legal rationale to avoid any adherence to the Geneva Conventions and thus to permit the widest possible range of interrogation techniques. By keeping other officials (including Secretary of State Powell, National Security Advisor Rice, and Attorney General Ashcroft) in the dark and using Addington's bullying tactics, Cheney got the Executive Order necessary to implement the policy. He presented it to President Bush, who signed it in November 2001, and then ensured that it was processed before any other high-ranking advisor could object. The Justice Department's memos of 2002, more than eagerly provided by John Yoo, only put the gloss on Cheney's precedent-setting decisions.

It gives pause for reflection that, amidst other stories of economic crisis and Presidential campaigns, Warrick's piece will probably be seen as "history". Its revelations still demand a contemporary answer. How did an American government, in the name of "freedom" and "democracy", sanction these activities?

The demand for that answer should never be given up. By coincidence, the book After Bush is being formally launched in London today. Amongst its many egregious errors, distortions, and distractions --- all in the service of "proving" that George W. Bush has established a legacy in the conduct of US foreign policy, one which should be exalted and continued --- is this sentence: "'Prisoner abuses’ were aberrations --- recurrent in every war --- rather than the logical consequence of the authority under which Bush acted.”

These were abuses --- without the quote marks. They were not aberrations. They were not just the logical outcomes, they were the intended outcomes of a policy developed from September 2001 by the Bush Administration, led by a Vice President dedicated to the expansion of his personal power and that of the Executive, supported by second-level officials like John Yoo happy to promote their own perversions of legality, and abetted by colleagues from Condoleezza Rice to Colin Powell to George Tenet who were either too cowed to fight back or too intent on covering their own backsides.

Any attempt to pretend otherwise, that we can just whisk away torture as a silly little aberration, is a disgrace to those of us who believe that "America" should stand for something beyond the expedient and the power-hungry.

----------------------

14 October

Financial Meltdown 101, Palin-Dromes, and Kristol Balls-Ups

Your Ten-Minute Guide to the Economic Crisis (Illustrated Version)

As a follow-up to yesterday's Watching America, AlterNet features an excellent explanation by Arun Gupta of the speculations, bank manouevres, and government (de)regulations that have led to this bit of an economic mess.

Anyone Can Be Vice President....Yes, Anyone

Fancy yourself as a Hockey Mom and US leader? Here's your chance, thanks to the Palindrome. It's as easy as stringing a few words together in a soundbite.

While We're Playing Games with the Vice-Presidency

In a tribute to the wonders of both American politics and 1970s US game shows, Sarah Palin makes a guest appearance on the $800 Billion (former $10,000) Pyramid.

The Award for Fastest 180-Degree Turn by a Political Guru

Sunday, 5 October: William Kristol showcases the political strategy of Sarah Palin:

Palin also made clear that she was eager for the McCain-Palin campaign to be more aggressive in helping the American people understand “who the real Barack Obama is.” Part of who Obama is, she said, has to do with his past associations, such as with the former bomber Bill Ayers. Palin had raised the topic of Ayers Saturday on the campaign trail, and she maintained to me that Obama, who’s minimized his relationship with Ayers, “hasn’t been wholly truthful” about this.

I pointed out that Obama surely had a closer connection to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright than to Ayers — and so, I asked, if Ayers is a legitimate issue, what about Reverend Wright?

She didn’t hesitate: “To tell you the truth, Bill, I don’t know why that association isn’t discussed more, because those were appalling things that that pastor had said about our great country, and to have sat in the pews for 20 years and listened to that — with, I don’t know, a sense of condoning it, I guess, because he didn’t get up and leave — to me, that does say something about character. But, you know, I guess that would be a John McCain call on whether he wants to bring that up.”...

She paused, and I was about to thank her for the interview, but she had one more thing to say. “Only maybe I’d add just a couple more words, and that would be: ‘Take the gloves off.’ ”

Sunday, 12 October: William Kristol comments on the campaign approach of Sarah Palin and John McCain:

Right now Obama’s approval/disapproval rating is better than McCain’s. Indeed, Obama’s is a bit higher than it was a month ago. That suggests the failure of the McCain campaign’s attacks on Obama.

So drop them.

----------------------

13 October

Now It's War: Hugo Chavez v. Ronald McDonald

From the New York Times: "The Venezuelan government ordered nearly all McDonald’s restaurants in the country closed for two days last week for what it called irregularities in the chain’s financial books.

The government’s tax agency said Friday that it had ordered more than 100 McDonald’s restaurants to shut temporarily. José David Cabello, the agency’s chief, announced on state television that “inconsistencies” had been found in sales and purchases books, as well as in taxes collected."

According to my informants, the US military response is likely to include not only the Marines but also the Hamburglar (working for Blackwater, Inc.), while Mayor McCheese will be joining President Bush's War Cabinet. It is still to be confirmed whether the US will supplement conventional operation with the chemical warfare of Hot Apple Pies.

----------------------

Watching America's Music Quiz of the Day

Is this 1980s tune the best country-and-western song ever?

----------------------

Your 10-Minute Guide to the Economic Crisis:

"Whatever Is Necessary, For as Long as Necessary"

So my father calls up and says, "What do you think is happening with this economy?" That's when I knew the situation was serious. So I got a lesson in all things financial, including swaps and derivatives, from my wife to figure out the following:

1. Capitalist systems are built on faith that money is good, so economic crises are crises of confidence. If banks or mortgage companies stop believing that they will get repaid, then they stop lending to each other and to us. When they do, a crisis of confidence because a very real crisis of no liquidity in the system.

2. The trigger for this crisis was the amount of "bad" mortgage debt that accumulated. Because of "swaps", not only the original lender but secondary lenders (who in effect took over the mortgage, swapping for it with money given to the original lender) ran into trouble on their books. When enough lenders --- not just "sub-prime" ones but the big ones in the industry --- fought themselves in this position, then the bubble of debt-financed growth burst.

3. Because Britain has the highest percentage of home ownership in Europe and is a key financial/lending centre, then it finds itself at the centre of the crisis, perhaps the most important player outside the United States. And that's why the British government has decided to move aggressively, in effect part-nationalising large banks this morning.

4. Besides buying Prime Minister Gordon Brown his political life, the British Government has bought itself some time. The question: can it rebuild enough confidence in the system to withstand the recession that is going to hit soon?

5. Second question: has the British Government taken the essential step that the US Government has refused to accept? Put another way, with a nod to Paul Krugman of the New York Times, has the US tied itself so firmly to a "private", case-by-case solution --- the latest measure being a quiet US Government guarantee for a Japanese buy-out of Morgan Stanley --- that it has tied its hands in solving the confidence/liquidity crisis?

Listen to podcast...

----------------------

10 October

Friday Buffet: Things That Make you go Mmmm

Eternal Progress



There is a philiosophical/mathematical concept called the Paradox of Xeno's Arrow, in which the arrow perpetually approaches its target but never reaches it.



Welcome to the 21st-century variant in US foreign policy: the Status of Forces Agreement with Iraq.



We have been told for close to two years that this arrangement, which in no way is a legitimation of the US occupation (and which in no way is a treaty, otherwise the US Congress would actually have to give its approval), is near. But, though it gets closer and closer, the agreement is never signed. US Secretary of State Condi Rice was even in Baghdad this summer to put the ink on the paper but had to go away empty-handed because of "bureaucratic reasons".



So, on Wednesday, this from Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zubari as he sat next to US Ambassador John Negroponte, "We are very close to a satisfactory result."



You think? Given that the Iraqi Parliament still can't agree on provincial elections across the country or an oil law and given that the Iraqi Parliament (unlike its US counterpart) has to be consulted, I think more weight should be put on Zubari's wishful call for "bold political decisions". Translation? The US Government will not agree to any Iraqi political or judicial oversight of the actions of the US military, which means the price of this agreement is a pretty sizeable chunk of the sovereignty of a "liberated" Iraq.



Commander-in-Chief Petraeus



This from Reuters "US Army General David Petraeus said on Tuesday that security gains in Iraq are increasingly durable but warned that the methods which helped reduce violence there may not work in Afghanistan."



Would-be President Obama, take note, because you've got a rival for command of US military strategy. Petraeus' statement translates as Surge in Iraq, No Surge in Afghanistan. That's not only a warning shot for Obama and his declaration that the fight for Afghanistan will define US foreign policy in 2009 but also to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.



I'm increasingly thinking that, in this electoral campaign, the most effective politician is the one sitting with four stars on his shoulder in Baghdad.



Today's Palinwatch



Publius, a reader from London, replies with appropriate reverence, to "The "Radicals" Take Over the White House!" (8 October):



"Palin is.....beyond the Palin ! What occurs to me is that Bob Dylan got it right when he wrote: 'You don't need a Weatherman to tell which way the wind blows.'



"I have bought a bumper sticker which reads, 'Republicans: You're Fired'. I am sure you're right. Mccain is toast."





Move Along, It's Just a Coincidence



The New York Times on Sunday: "Reports Link Karzai's Brother to Afghanistan Heroin Trade"



The BBC on Wednesday: "The Afghan president's brother sat with former Taleban leaders at a religious meal hosted by the Saudi King Abdullah last month. The meeting is regarded as a possible prelude to talks between the Afghan government and the Islamic movement."



So a case of good ol' free-market drug economics bringing together former enemies or good ol' American "information" to stave off any negotiations with the Taliban?





The Final Word on Billy Joel



Replying to "Watching America's Culture Debate of the Day" (8 October), a reader from Birmingham has tracked down the official story of "Scenes from an Italian Restaurant":



"In 1982, I met Billy Joel through a friend who worked with one of the producers on "The Stranger" (He calls himself "Bill"). I asked Billy about this song and he told me it was actually three songs --- rather, unfinished pieces of three songs. He tied them all together into the medley we all love today as an homage to the B side of Abbey Road. The song, as Billy himself told me, is based LOOSELY on some High School chums of his, not the King and Queen of the prom (that was just some added flair he said), but lovers who had a passionate relationship that fizzled after real-life set in. He continued to say that the song is about how we are changed by time, circumstance, and love; and also about how we adapt to those changes as we get older and our own circumstances change around us. These words are from the man himself."



In our opinion, however, the last word on this 1970s cultural memory has come from a reader in Leicester:



"Scenes from an Italian Restaurant is rubbish. It doesn't matter if you stripped down the production it would still be a really generic, impersonal-sounding song that has no right to be upbeat in the middle section, a fact that only highlights that it's actually two songs badly spot-welded together. And the only thing that dates it to the 70s is the fact that it was written by an ageing babyboomer known for whining about how things were better when he was in high school and America was great and Kennedy was still alive."

----------------------

8 October

Watching America's Culture Debate of the Day

Billy Joel's "Scenes from an Italian Restaurant": Inspired musical observation of 1970s America or just a load of overproduced rubbish?

----------------------

8 October

It's Almost Official: The "Radicals" Take Over the White House!

[Apologies to anyone who sees triumphalism in the headline. But the Red Sox beat the Angels in Game 5 of the Baseball Division Series --- a "quarter-final" for you Brits who don't appreciate the finer sports --- and Tina Fey is becoming a comedy demi-goddess with her takeover of Sarah Palin. So, all in all, a great week for culture if a dodgy one for politics and, oh yeah, the economy.] I noticed the story a couple of weeks ago and then, with the financial crisis kicking off, filed it away. It was irritating, as another example of distortion and name-calling masquerading as news, but I didn't think it would have much of a shelf life. This morning, I returned to that headline in the 23 September issue of the Wall Street Journal.

This purported investigative journalism concerns the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, a foundation supporting educational initiatives in the city or, as the story frames it, "pour[ing] more than $100 million into the hands of community organizers and radical education activists". It so happens that Barack Obama was a board member of the CAC from 1995 to 2001. However, the main point of Stanley Kurtz's article is not to critique Obama's approach to education, which apparently focuses more "on political consciousness, Afrocentricity and bilingualism than traditi]onal education". Instead, it is to tie Obama, once and for all, to the radical menace named William Ayers.

Ayers, a teacher and community organiser, was a founder of the political movement Weather Underground in the 1960s. The "Weathermen" adopted violent methods in the early 1970s, including a series of bombings between 1969 and 1975. Although he was never convicted on criminal charges, Ayers was a fugitive until 1980. He subsequently returned to education, becoming a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago and serving on a series of community educational projects.

Now, since Barack Obama didn't even show up in Chicago until the mid-1980s, it's a bit of a stretch to make him an honorary Weatherman/terrorist. So Kurtz's strategy is to argue, "for Ayers, teaching and his 1960s radicalism are two sides of the same coin". That, in turn, makes the CAC is "infusing students and their parents with a radical political commitment". Which mean Obama is "lending moral and financial support to Mr. Ayers and his radical circle".

One could, with the same series of leaps across times, politics, and social activism, claim that Chicago Mayor Richard Daley Jr., who supported the CAC, is also an accomplice in this support of radicalism. The Annenberg Foundation, the legacy of the media magnate Walter Annenberg, becomes the funder not of education, but of terrorism and incredible evil.

Why spend valuable time replaying Kurtz's allegations rather than, say, discussing last night's Presidential debate between McCain and Obama? Well, because the real contribution of the Wall Street Journal in this case is not to journalism but to a political funeral. So long, John. And Sarah.

The media line has been that the McCain campaign turned to the Big Negative this weekend when Vice-Presidential candidate Sarah Palin labelled Obama as "someone who sees America as imperfect enough to pal around with terrorists". She added, via the increasingly-frantic William Kristol that it would be nice if someone mentioned Obama's relationship with the Reverend Jeremiah Wright: "I don’t know why that association isn’t discussed more, because those were appalling things that that pastor had said about our great country."

However, Kurtz's piece, published before the first Presidential and Vice-Presidential debates, makes it clear that the McCain-Palin camp and their media supporters have never let go of the demonising, guilt-by-association strategy. It's just that, while the Republicans thought they had a good shot at victory, these stories would just be filtered --- not so loudly, but just as insidiously --- through the coverage and chit-chat about the election.

The last gasp of that approach came last Thursday when Palin played nice in the debate with Joe Biden. She set aside the swipes at radical and extremists in favour of the "aw shucks" smile-and-wink appeal to the American public. When it became clear in the following 48 hours that Palin hadn't turned around the polls or the media focus, the Hockey Mom start swinging her mean stick again.

Ain't gonna work. In the opening stages of a campaign, playing nasty with guilt-by-association --- as the elder Bush did in 1988 against Michael Dukakis or the younger Bush did in the 2000 primaries against McCain --- can give you a valuable advantage. That depends, however, on no other "critical" issues emerging and taking over the campaign agenda. Forgive my repetition, but economy, economy, economy is now the name of this electoral game. (In an unguarded moment, a McCain advisor admitted this over the weekend.)

Which is why you can file away last night's debate in the Makes No Difference folder. The Palin tactic of "I'm not going to answer that question, instead I'm going to talk about..." wasn't possible for Big John. There was never a chance that McCain could respond to a question like "How would you respond to the worsening situation in the stock markets and the financial sector" with the reply, "My opponent Barack is a raving socialist who will take down the entire economic system and turn your children into Commie radicals." No possibility of leaping from "What do you think of the downturn in a place like Wisconsin?" to "Wow, did you know that Bill Ayers --- a neighbour of my opponent --- once fire-bombed the University of Wisconsin?"

It's a somewhat bizarre and not-too-uplifting note, but let's note it anyway....

Seems that, when the economy is collapsing, folks don't have time for good ol' culture wars.

----------------------

7 October

You (and probably John McCain) Have Just Been Barack Roll'd

I'm teaching in Dublin today. So, in advance of an Election Special on Wednesday, here's a treat from the happy marriage of politics and culture.

Students have told me of a phenomenon called Rick Rolling, which must be good as it has propelled 1980s music legend Rick Astley into the cultural spotlight. While many are now trying to seize upon Rick Rolling for their own worthy/dubious ends, it seems the Democratic candidate for President may have outdone them all....

----------------------

6 October

Iraq and Afghanistan: Can We Just Declare Victory and Go Home?

OK, I give. Can we just call it a draw on the "victory of the Iraq surge" story?

Never mind that suicide bombings are still a regular occurrence. Forget the political violence and assassinations, which continue if on a reduced level from the worst days of 2006. Don't give a thought to the border issues, with Turkey attacking areas in Kurdistan in retribution for the killing of their troops by Kurdish insurgents. And don't try to get a grip on the manoeuvring for power, which has led to "partial" democracy in 2009 --- provincial elections in parts of Iraq but not in areas like Kirkuk.

Just hail King David (as he is anointed in The Times today) --- General Petraeus, saviour of Iraq.

Tragically, it's still too easy to cut through this guff. The latest refutation comes from researchers at the University of California, Los Angeles, who have used satellite imagery to establish that the drop in Iraqi violence is due in large part to "ethnic cleansing". Simply and brutally put, after years of fighting and intimidation, there weren't as many folks of the "wrong" religion --- Shi'a in Sunni areas, Sunni in Shi'a --- to be killed.

The surge myth is necessary, however, for two reasons. One is straightforward domestic politics in the US --- who would want to admit that five years in Iraq end not with a glorious bang but with the continuing whimper of American failure? Certainly not an outgoing President whose "legacy", up to the economic events of the last month, was going to be defined by the war. And certainly not a Republican candidate for President whose strategy, up to the economic events of the last month, was to use Iraq to show he was tougher than his Democratic opponent.

The second reason, a more serious one in the long one, is to lay the platform for the long-term US presence in Iraq. It's difficult to rationalise permanent bases and 50,000 American troops in the country on the basis that Iraq is going to hel