Color me amazed at the exchanges between Senator McCain and two supporters (well, I don’t know if they will support him after this; thanks to Allahpundit at Hot Air for the video):
I’m 34 years old. So I haven’t been around long enough to see many presidential elections. But has this ever happened before with a presidential candidate; where he/she rhetorically rips the spine out of one or more supporters on national television? That’s what McCain did in the video clip. They expressed their fears of Obama (unjustified in my opinion but the fears are deeply legitimate to them) to McCain and he basically scolds them for that fear. Color me amazed squared.
Part of me is saying, “What in the heck are you doing McCain! Those folks are your base!”. Another part of me feels McCain is a damn brave soul for going after his supporters in front of the camera like this. Either way, the McCain Campaign has entered The Outer Limits of Politics. They Who Control What We See are giving us good stuff:
We have been here before, and we can learn from the past.
On March 4, 1933, Franklin D. Roosevelt took the oath of office and told Americans, “(T)he only thing we have to fear is fear itself…nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance…
“Values have shrunken to fantastic levels, taxes have risen, our ability to pay has fallen, government of all kinds is faced by serious curtailment of income, the means of exchange are frozen in the currents of trade, the withered leaves of industrial enterprise lie on every side…the savings of many years in thousands of families are gone.”
But FDR came to the White House ready to take action, and he did. When the next president moves into the White House in January, it may be too late to start.
Contrary to the now-popular wisdom about the end of American financial dominance, Jorge Castro of Argentina’s Clarin newspaper argues that the crisis merely demonstrates the inherent strength of the United States and its primacy within the global economy.
After agreeing with those that believe John McCain is running out of options this election cycle, Castro writes in part:
“The U.S. economy is, like its currency, the reserve and the most technologically advanced platform in the world. More than in normal times, this crises is revealing of the essential nature of this phenomenon. U.S. productivity is as important to the structure of global power as the law of gravity is to physics.”
‘THE RETURN OF FAITH’
[Het Parool, The Netherlands]
With finger-pointing over the global financial crisis rapidly spreading, William Waack of Brazil’s O Globo warns that developing countries are in no way shielded from the effects - and that blaming others won’t do a thing to help Brazil or the world emerge from the hole they are in.
“‘Contagion’ suggests that it might be possible to prevent the “disease,” as long as the potential victim remains isolated from the source of infection (in this case, the American economy). That’s pure nonsense, and it’s dangerous, because it overshadows what must be done and delays the adoption of protective measures. … We can dispense with the notion of ‘decoupling.’”
“The more advanced and competitive a national economic system is, the more it will be affected by the crisis. Therefore, it’s Brazil the exporter and innovator which is connected with the global economy that will face the worst consequences. And it is that modern country - industry, agro-business, services and competitive exporters of mineral commodities - that have ensured our prosperity so far. … Schadenfreude, a German word that has been adopted by the Anglo-Saxon press, means to take pleasure in the misfortune of others. The New York Times this Thursday pointed out the fact that many Latin American leaders, among them Chávez [Venezuela], Morales[Bolivia], Correa [Ecuador], Kirchner [Argentina] and Lula [Brazil], allowed themselves be get carried away with schadenfreude in regard to the crisis in the United States. And now, they’re getting carried away with fear. ”
Since Governor Sarah Palin has blasted on the scene, I’ve been wondering how she would have done if she were running in the Republican primary. She would have stuck out like a sore big toe among that super-dull crowd of McCain, Thompson, Giuliani, Romney, and others (well Mike Huckabee was not that dull). Can you imagine the “Sarahcuda” on the debate stage hurling zingers at those good ol’ boys? And could she really have won the Republican Party nomination?
And speaking of debates, why have all these rules? Why not throw McCain, Obama, Palin, and Biden in the debate ring together unfiltered? Just let them sling diamonds and mud at each other and see who’s left standing. Why do we get all stodgy in these debates when we’re a country of constant entertainment and excitement?
Just some things to think about before the big bad debate between Senator John “Palin Said Knock You Out” McCain and Senator Barack “Cool As The Other Side Of The Pillow” Obama.
Tonight all eyes will be focused on my home state of Tennessee, where the debate will take place at Belmont University. While I’m not a native of this state - I was born in New Jersey, moved to Virginia as a child, went to grad school in Illinois and live here permanently - I can say a fair amount about the great Volunteer State.
First of all, Tennessee is divided into three distinctive regions. Tennessee is a VERRRY LOOONG state at about 500 miles east to west (and only about 120 miles north to south). The mountainous region in the East bears little resemblance to the Mississippi River bottomlands near Memphis.
It’s even in our state constitution that we apportion judicial appointments based on the three “Grand Divisions” of the state: East, Middle and West. Our state flag has three stars on it, each representing one of the three regions.
I live in East Tennessee, which is defined by the Appalachian Mountain chain. Within Appalachia are the Smoky Mountains on the east, the Tennessee Valley in the middle and the Cumberland Mountains in the west. By eastern standards, the Smokies are gigantic, reaching 6,643 feet at Clingman’s Dome. As some of the oldest mountains in the world, the Appalachians are much lower than the Rockies or the Alps. But they are rich in biodiversity; the Smokies are actually a rainforest climate with some of the richest diversity of plant and animal life on earth. Most of the population of East Tennessee lives in the Tennessee Valley, which itself is divided by several smaller ridges. Knoxville is the largest city in East Tennessee, though Chattanooga comes in a close second. Further to the northeast are the Tri-Cities of Johnson City, Bristol and Kingsport. To the west of these cities lay the more rugged Cumberland Mountains, stretching from Cumberland Gap (where TN, VA and KY all meet) to Lookout Mountain in Chattanooga. Just beyond the coal-rich Cumberland Mountains is the Cumberland Plateau, a hilly plateau filled with beautiful horse farms and stunning rock formations more like those found in Utah.
Historically, East Tennessee has been the most Republican part of the state. But this is NOT because it’s the most conservative. Rather, it’s because the vast majority of East Tennesseans supported the Union during the Civil War. In the decades that followed, the entire South turned to the Democratic Party while East Tennessee remained loyal to the Republicans. There have always been pockets of Democratic strength in East Tennessee, and the Democratic Party is much stronger here now than 30 years ago, but it is still a Republican stronghold.
Beyond the Cumberland Plateau is the Highland Rim and the Nashville Basin, which defines Middle Tennessee. This has always been the wealthiest part of the state. It is also the most politically-fickle, traditionally Democratic but now solidly-Republican in some suburbs. Williamson County, where many country music stars live, is the most Republican county in the state (even though most country music stars are as avowedly-Democratic as Hollywood stars; Toby Keith, Merle Haggard, Ralph Stanley, Tim McGraw and Brad Paisley are just some of the high-profile country artists that back Obama).
As the Tennessee River shoots back up out of Alabama, it defines the boundary between Middle and West Tennessee. The western part of the state is flatter and has fewer towns. It was defined by larger cotton plantations in the Old South and agribusiness today. It is the most African-American part of the state, with Memphis as its largest city. It is also the most Democratic part of the state, although the East Memphis suburbs are strongly Republican. If there are still rural, white Southern yellow Democrats out there, however, they are found in the rural counties of northwest Tennessee.
Tennessee is one of the most beautiful states in the Union. It is also one of the most culturally rich, giving to the nation rock-and-roll, blues, bluegrass, country and soul music.
The debate tonight is at Belmont University, which is a Southern Baptist college with a very conservative reputation. I’d assume, however, that the audience participating in the debate will be drawn from the wider population and not just Belmont. Nevertheless, it is one of several colleges and universities in the Nashville area.
I just wanted to put out a big hello from our state to the world before tonight’s debate!
With much of the developed world pointing fingers at American greed and free enterprise as the central culprit of the current financial crisis, Thomas Fricke, Chief Economics Editor at the Financial Times Deutschland, has another explanation.
“German politicians badmouth bank managers or (indebted) Americans, demanding that with their private assets, they be held liable … Certainly, there are horrible people who always want to obtain more money. The only question is whether this is the problem at hand. And whether it explains why the world of finance regularly confronts increasingly dangerous crises. … The problem may be less about greed, and more about the fact that bankers and investors today are severely overwhelmed. This is instead, a system-wide problem.”
“It was perhaps not such a great idea to introduce financial innovations, the function of which even professional hedge fund managers declare themselves puzzled and even mystified … the financial world would do well to shift down a few gears and adjust its business practices to the limited capacity of human beings to adapt.”
Throughout time immigrants have driven the growth and prosperity of this country. The concept of illegal immigrants is a relatively recent one. The idea that we should keep out those who don’t look like us, however, is an age-old effort. Whether we like it or not, immigrants are critical to the future of the US economy. There is a simple way to solve this problem. Make them join a union.
Who comes to the US? Immigrants are people with the guts to leave their families, cultures and traditions to venture into a new land in search of a way to improve themselves. They are tough, clever and self-sufficient.
Most people fear the risks and stay home, no matter the desperation of their native situation. Immigrants bear these great burdens and still send most of their often meager wages home. Immigrants are truly special people. This has always been what defines Americans. This applies to Mexican immigrants as completely it has to all other nationalities.
A Bit of History: As always, we should learn from our past or suffer the same errors. Immigration laws are a recent concept. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 was the first broad immigration law. Still immigrants were generally welcomed and helped by Americans to adjust to and become part of society.
Laws of Exclusion: Prior to 1952, “immigration laws” were designed solely to exclude certain ethnic groups. The Naturalization Act of 1790 excluded blacks except as slaves. After that there were acts specifically excluding Chinese, Japanese, Asian Indians, Filipinos, and others. Isn’t our current policy strikingly similar? http://www.umass.edu/complit/aclanet/USMigrat.html We became a melting pot despite our white ancestors’ best efforts.
The Baby Boom: In 1965 we first began to prefer immigrants with skills. The Baby-boomers were coming of age. Births rose dramatically from 1945 to 1957. After that rates fell. The Baby-boom generation officially extends to 1964. A graph of births per year can be found here.
There was a glut of new 20-something workers entering the marketplace to fill the less-skilled positions at the bottom of the growing corporate pyramid. Unskilled immigrant workers, therefore, would further overfill an overflowing population.
1990 was the tipping point.
The youngest Baby boomers turned 26 and wanted to move out of the lowest-level jobs. The problem, there were simply not enough young workers to replace them. Businesses found they could not fill the unskilled workers with Americans. They had two choices:
1. Hire immigrants, or
2. Outsource to other countries.
Based on the needs and resources of their business, they did both.
As time passed, the situation worsened. There was pressure to outsource as China found a great new way to drive its economy. There was pressure for Mexicans to come to the United States to fill the jobs left vacant. For years we ignored them as we always had.
Immigrants are Critical to Our Economy.
When a corporation outsources jobs overseas, it no longer needs the supervisors or managers above that group of workers and those jobs are lost as well.
When a corporation hires immigrants, all of the supervisory and management jobs are retained in the US to oversee those workers.
9/11
Then the Bush Administration slammed the door using 9/11 as the excuse. By some accounts there are around 10 million “illegal” aliens in the United States. They have been here for years helping to fill the critical jobs at the bottom of the corporate pyramid.
Mexican immigrants could not go back home, as they had for years, for fear they would not be able to return to the US. The vast majority, like all Americans, had good steady jobs and paid their taxes and even contributed to Social Security and Medicare without hope of benefiting from them.
The Solution is Simple
You cannot remove ten million people, even if you could find them. We cripple US businesses struggling already to compete by denying them Mexican workers.
Pure amnesty is simply politically impossible. A fence is just silly.
Undocumented Workers Must Join a Union
If we provided that any illegal alien could secure all necessary working papers to become “legal” so long as they join a recognized American union and remain in good standing, we would solve all of the problems associated with Mexican workers.
Then employers have no excuse. If they need more low-skilled workers, they need only turn to the unions. Any illegal alien who chooses not to join a union, will not be able to find work.
Unions will help workers adjust to our culture, language and work ethic. They will help them secure training and better wages, make sure they are not competing with Americans, and help ensure they have health and other insurance.
American workers, whether in guilds, trades or unions, have always been there to help immigrants adapt. They will do it again.
October 2nd, 2008 By SWARAAJ CHAUHAN, International Columnist
Even with the global financial crisis looming large on the horizon, and its consequent crippling effects becoming clearer, the US media’s/blogs’ continued obsession with “what Obama/McCain/Palin/Biden said”, and then “what Obama/McCain/Palin/Biden replied” would appear myopic and tragic.
The media/blogs have seemingly abdicated their traditional responsibility of explaining/warning about major/critical issues.
In this theatre of the absurd, Playboy magazine is “offering a new way to lose your shirt on Wall Street.
“The adult entertainment magazine, long famous for its photo spreads of nude women and lessons in living the urbane life of the well-heeled bachelor, is launching a search for models to pose for its upcoming feature, ‘Women of Wall Street’.”More here…
October 2nd, 2008 By SWARAAJ CHAUHAN, International Columnist
I agree with the The Economist that in this global crisis the governments must work together. But no one talks of the world’s ordinary people who have to bear the additional burden in the wake of this and other crisis, which in the first place can be attributed to the callousness and greed of the governments/leaders and financial institutions themselves (especially the bankers).
First the world leaders blow up trillions of dollars on unending “wars”, and then fail in their duty to monitor/regulate the questionable strategies of the financial and corporate world (especially when the governments themselves have to bail them out with taxpayers’ money). What a ‘free’ and ‘democratic’ world we live in!!!
The Economist notes: “After the (rescue) plan’s thrashing by the House of Representatives on September 29th, spurred on by voters’ loathing of ‘casino capitalism’, investors panicked. Yet as The Economist went to press, they were optimistic that, after winning the Senate’s approval on October 1st, the plan would pass.
“Even if it does, that should not be a cause for optimism. Look beyond the stock markets, especially at the seized-up money markets, and there is little to see except bank failures, emergency rescues and high anxiety in the credit markets. These forces are drawing the financial system closer to disaster and the rich world to the edge of a nasty recession (see article). The bail-out package should mitigate the problems, but it will not avert them.
“The crisis is spreading in two directions—across the Atlantic to Europe, and out of the financial markets into the real economy. Governments have been dealing with it disaster by disaster. They have struggled to gain control not just because of the speed of contagion but also because policymakers, and the public they serve, have failed fully to grasp the breadth and depth of the crisis.” More here…
Meanwhile Russian prime minister Vladimir Putin has accused the United States of “irresponsibility” as he criticised its primary role in the economic and financial turmoil that has undermined the foundations of global capitalism across the world. More here…
And French president Sarkozy tries to rally united European response to the crisis.More here…
October 1st, 2008 By BRIJ KHINDARIA, International Columnist
The Senate’s $700 billion bailout plan is getting a lukewarm reception in Asian markets, including Japan, where investors have been watching it very closely. Japanese markets opened without much excitement although it is still too early to see any real trends.
The wariness abroad stems mainly from fears that the underlying US bricks and mortar economy, also called the real economy, may not be as strong as everyone hopes. The financial economy, especially the giant investment and mortgage banks and insurance sector, seemed quite robust just a few months ago creating the impression that the sub-prime loan debacle was limited to the immediate lenders. There may be similar weaknesses of unsustainable debt hidden in businesses of the real economy. For instance, Warren Buffet has recently poured billions into General Electric, probably the most admired company around the world.
The current disaster happened because it turned out financial derivatives several layers below the immediate lenders were so worthless that underwriters could no longer obtain cash flow to cover their own debt. Financial institutions stopped lending because there was no way of calculating the worth of collateral any more. In a market economy, worth is determined through pricing. When no one is willing to buy, the asset has no monetary value so credit dries up.
The Senate bailout plan, approved by a convincing 74 to 25 vote margin, opens the possibility of a return of buyer’s confidence allowing assets to gain more than zero values. But investors will not return to the market in sufficient numbers until the bail out’s approval by Congress.
Even if all goes well, it is not clear that businesses, city administrations, home owners and car buyers will be able to obtain enough credit from local lenders to stop a downward spiral in industrial and services output.
If tight credit continues, business and consumer demand will revive very slowly. That puts GDP growth in jeopardy when combined with the vast government debt, resulting partly from the bailout. Getting back to 3 or 3.5% GDP growth may take more than a couple of years.
The risk of further downslide in GDP figures cannot be ruled out. Investors are factoring in those doubts as financial markets open. The initial trend will become apparent within the next 12 hours as markets open in Europe and then in New York.
At first glance, the Senate package is better than the one that failed a few days ago. To the $700 billion, it adds about $100 billion (perhaps up to $300 billion) in various kinds of relief for tax payers. Normally earmarks and suspension of tax burdens are bad things partly because they are bribes paid to buy votes on the floor. But they are acceptable under the current dire circumstances.
At this time, anything is welcome that avoids foreclosures and allows people to keep their existing homes, including such indirect influences as earmarks and other covert relief. Actions that put more spending power in main street’s hands, whatever the tricks used, are acceptable at a time when the real economy could slide into recession because even those who are creditworthy cannot raise loans.
It is not quite true anymore that the world catches a cold when American financial markets sneeze. But it is true that a lot of the world’s savings are invested in various US financial instruments. A sickening American economy could cause so many losses around the world that global trade and business may slow down.
That could cause a global recession although the one in the US may be worse. This is a tragic prospect but the really scary thing is that global economic instability triggered by the US is likely to geometrically multiply security risks from civil violence in poor countries and feed into global terrorism.
So like the Senate, members of Congress should put aside their immediate electoral battles to give the bailout non-partisan and convincing approval. Nothing less is capable of restoring the trust and confidence in US governance required not only to protect the livelihoods of Americans but also prevent potentially dramatic and very costly unrest around the world.
ON THE KNIVES IN BUSH’S BACK: REPUBLICAN ON BUSH’S CHEST: EMERGENCY PLAN - NO CAPTION: REACTION OF SUPPORTERS
Perhaps more than at any other time in recent years the current financial crisis brings to the fore a question at the root of the great American - and transatlantic - political divide: What is the proper role of government?
According to William Waack, chief international columnist for O Globo of Brazil, the current crisis should prompt the State-Market pendulum to swing decidedly in the direction of the State. But he cautions Social Democrats from being holier than thou:
“What are the long-term social and political consequences of this cataclysm? (Yes, we are confronting a catastrophe). … European commentators (French and German in particular) are signaling the end of the Anglo-Saxon “way” of looking at financial markets. … There’s a debate between the two sides of the Atlantic which is much more cultural than ideological, about the proper role of government - and not just in crisis situations.”
“Curiously, Europeans are again raising the banner of fundamental economic values like work and savings, versus the “Anglo-Saxon style” of taking out loans and taking risks on capital markets. It’s interesting to note that in societies elsewhere on the planet (Japan for example) “work” and “savings” are values that are greatly cultivated. But even this - and not very long ago - failed to allow the Japanese to escape from a very difficult economic situation.”
“But one can say that in terms of the ‘cultural’ aspects of the debate between State and Market, the pendulum should move strongly in the direction of the former. All of this should considerably raise our level of insecurity when confronting a world in which everything not long ago seemed explained, connected, adjusted and, in the end, controllable.”
On Monday morning, when the future of the American Dream was teetering under the Capitol dome, George W. Bush was in the East Room of the White House presenting the National Medal of Science and Technology and Innovation to men and women “whose discoveries have changed America and the world.”
Their names ranged from Willson to Lefkowitz to El-Sayed to O’Malley, a mosaic of the ethnic and cultural diversity that reflects the strength of a country where everyone, if you go back far enough, comes from an immigrant family.
One of them was my cousin, Leonard Kleinrock. His father and mine came here after World War I, with nothing but hope and struggled through a Depression to give their children a better life than they had had.
The citation read: “The 2007 National Medal of Science to Leonard Kleinrock for his fundamental contributions to the mathematical theory of modern data networks, and for the functional specification of packet switching, which is the foundation of Internet technology. His mentoring of generations of students has led to the commercialization of technologies that have transformed the world.”
I can tell you all this here only because of the achievements that led to his being called “the father of the Internet” and at a moment in history when we all need to be reminded that America is a place where, with determination and hard work, everything is possible.
History tells us that even the best foreign soldiers, and great conquerors and diplomats, in the world have met their nemesis in Afghanistan. So it would do no harm even if presidential hopefuls Obama/McCain too leaf through the past and recent history.
The intelligent US soldier Petraeus is likely to discover that Afghanistan has been a graveyard of the ambitions of the mighty empire builders — including Alexander the Great, the Great Mughals, the clever British colonialists, and the powerful Soviets. All of them failed to subdue its hardy and fiercely independent people inhabiting the toughest of mountainous terrain.
What have the US/NATO forces achieved in the past six years? Is there any other option to sort out the Afghanistan mess? General Petraeus has one month before he takes up the challenging Afghanistan assignment. I strongly recommend that he, or any other person interested in Afghanistan, should read at least three books to get an inkling of the enormous challenge ahead.
In Afghanistan the invading forces are fighting not just ‘militants/terrorists’ but a centuries old way of life and culture that have flourished to this day. So the biggest challenge before Petraeus/NATO forces is how to win the “War against Terror” without losing forever the goodwill of the people in Afghanistan/Pakistan. (In an interview this week General Petraeus expected the fight against the insurgents in Afghanistan and Pakistan to get worse before it got better).
General Petraeus must know that “low intensity war” is different from a full-fledged war and hence the strategy has to be different. In such long-lasting wars, the armed forces should play a stand-by role, leaving the civilians to tackle day-to-day exigencies. India learnt it the hard way. In fact, General Petraeus should seek active participation of seasoned Indian and Pakistani soldiers in his new enterprise.
Meanwhile to get a fascinating insight into the complex yet fascinating past (as well as present) of this part of the Indian subcontinent I recommend a newly-released book by a young British woman (Empires of the Indus — The Story of A River by Alice Albinia) that I read recently.
I quote from a review in the Financial Times: “Empires of the Indus is a magnificent book, a triumphant melding of travel and history into a compelling story of adventure and discovery. Alice Albinia has…a captivating account of her explorations through Pakistan, Afghanistan, India and Tibet, taking us back in time to the earliest days. We have been drawn through an array of peoples, cultures, landscapes and stories.” More here…
Or the review by Nigel Collett (author of The Butcher of Amritsar: Brigadier-General Reginald Dyer). “She (Alice Albinia) traverses areas darkened by the fanatics of the Muslim world, areas from which the faint hearted of the west have been frightened by books such as Bernard-Henri Levy’s account of the murder of Daniel Pearl. Read the rest of this entry »
There seems to be a global theme emerging in regard to President Bush and the financial crisis. Hot on the heels of yesterday’s Le Figaro article, ‘The Financial Crisis and the Curse of George W. Bush,’ Sérgio Malbergier of Brazil’s Folha also writes of the apparent bad luck of our beleaguered leader.
“George W. Bush, 62, is going to go down history. Fate has gotten him twice, and it has gotten him good. The first time, the aircraft-bombing of September 11, 2001 caught the President after less than nine months in the most important office of the world, when he had little international experience. He sought refuge in the wisdom of the Vice President and the Pentagon hawks - and the world has never the same. Bush’s second Big Bang is the collapse of the American financial system, which too, will never be the same.”
“The way John McCain and Barack Obama behave in the face of this economic crisis may well define who will succeed Bush, in what remains the most important position in the world. … McCain seems lost as does the Republican right, which turned a blind eye to the financial time-bomb on Wall Street.”
“President Lula is one of the biggest jokers with regard to the American situation. He has already offered proposals that are humorous and serious, which must confuse the Brazilian desk at the American Department of State. He should treat the crisis with greater seriousness and prepare the country accordingly. If he doesn’t, it’ll be like those Brazilians who think they know it all and brutally attack the tortures committed by American troops against foreign prisoners at Guantánamo, but say nothing about Brazilian citizens being tortured by Brazilian police in police stations right next to their homes.”
A 390-page report by the Inspector General is only a small step for mankind in bringing Karl Rove to justice for what he did to the Justice Department in the firing of the nine US attorneys, but it’s a start.
The internal investigation finds political pressure drove the 2006 dismissals but that refusal of major players at the White House and the department to cooperate in the year-long inquiry has left significant “gaps” in understanding what happened.
Investigators’ doubts have led Attorney General Michael Mukasey to appoint Acting United States Attorney in Connecticut Nora Dannehy, who led the conviction of a former governor for corruption, to continue the probe and decide if anyone should be prosecuted.
The “anyone” list starts with Bush’s White House toadies, Karl Rove and Harriet Miers, and goes on to former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales…
September 29th, 2008 By MICHAEL STICKINGS, Assistant Editor
An AP investigation has found that “[t]hough Sarah Palin depicts herself as a pit bull fighting good-old-boy politics, in her years as mayor she and her friends received special benefits more typical of small-town politics as usual.”
There are simply too many examples of corruption and cronyism to repeat here. Many of them are fairly small-time, but they fit in with the pattern we’ve seen so far, the pattern that includes Troopergate and her lobbying to secure earmarks both for Wasilla and for Alaska.
We know that as Governor, she hired underqualified friends to run state programs at salaries far above those in the private sector. We know that she used her authority to pressure the firing of a former relative, and fired a commissioner who defied her. We know that she is actively obstructing the investigation into the matter. We know she has repeatedly lied about her initial support for the “Bridge to Nowhere.” These are not isolated events. They show a pattern of corruption.
And it isn’t just Palin, of course.
Whatever his reputation as a maverick reformer, the reality is that McCain has a long history of questionable ties to certain industries — telecom, alcohol, gaming, etc. — that supported him financially and that, as a senator, he was responsible for regulating (or de-regulating), notably as chairman of the Commerce and Indian Affairs committees.
For more on this, see this piece from Saturday’s New York Times on McCain’s ties to gambling: “McCain portrays himself as a Washington maverick unswayed by special interests, referring recently to lobbyists as ‘birds of prey.’ Yet in his current campaign, more than 40 fund-raisers and top advisers have lobbied or worked for an array of gambling interests — including tribal and Las Vegas casinos, lottery companies and online poker purveyors.”
After pulling an all-nighter, the low-approval gang in Washington is ready to give us their new, improved version of the $700 billion gamble nobody understands but practically all are sure is needed to keep the sky from falling.
The 1980s Tom Hanks movie, “The Money Pit,” comes to mind as Congress and the Administration enthuse over the financial structure we’re buying with a $250 million down payment that may or may not stand up until their successors move in next January.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi congratulates the negotiators for “the great work they have done” to “insulate Main Street and everyday Americans from the crisis on Wall Street” while Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson gets up off his knees to celebrate “a deal which will work and be effective in the marketplace.”
But as the happy couple prepare for the Housewarming, the grumpy former tenant Newt Gingrich stands outside bitching that “it’s probably impossible, without the president getting a new secretary of the treasury, to get to a good deal…We’re taking an immediate tummy ache, and we’re in danger of turning it into cancer.”
September 26th, 2008 By SWARAAJ CHAUHAN, International Columnist
The US presidential elections have this time evoked great public interest worldwide. The Economist has invited the public to vote online for their favourite candidate. The voting has already begun. It is interesting to see the voting trend from Bangladesh to Australia…More here…
September 25th, 2008 By SWARAAJ CHAUHAN, International Columnist
In the midst of the fear psychosis and frenzy created by the US/global economic meltdown, a grave and dramatic encounter between the US and the Pakistani troops went almost unnoticed. The Economist reports that although both the US and Pakistan deny it; “but it appears that on September 15th they fought a short war.
“America started it. Local reports suggest that, under cover of darkness, two helicopter-loads of its soldiers crossed on foot from Afghanistan into the Pakistani tribal area—and terrorist haven—of South Waziristan. But, on this occasion, Pakistani border troops responded as to the act of aggression that it constituted: shooting over the heads of the advancing Americans, forcing them back.
“So, for related reasons, the ramifications could hardly be greater. A ruggedly inaccessible region, the tribal areas form a hinge between Pakistan and Afghanistan. By manipulating the sentiments of the 3.5m Pushtun tribesfolk who live there, past rulers, including British colonial administrators and Pakistani dictators, have sought to influence events in Afghanistan, where Pushtuns also predominate.
“In this way, the Soviet army was driven from Afghanistan in 1989—by American-armed mujahideen. But now, in a sadly predictable repetition, it is America and its allies that attract the tribesmen’s wrath.
“Mr Bush’s new aggression was first unveiled on September 3rd with an American airborne assault on the village of Jala Khel, in South Waziristan, which, American officials claimed, killed a score of al-Qaeda militants. The army and journalists in Pakistan said the victims were civilians.
“The (Pakistan) army chief, General Ashfaq Kayani—hand-picked and American-approved successor in that job of America’s former ally, Pervez Musharraf—denounced the attack and vowed to defend Pakistan’s territory ‘at all cost’, and an army spokesman said American invaders would be shot.” More here…
Meanwhile AP reports today: “Pakistani troops fired at American reconnaissance helicopters near the Afghan-Pakistan border Thursday, and ground troops then exchanged fire, the U.S. military said.” More here…
ABC News reports: “U.S. Central Command spokesman Rear Adm. Greg Smith said Pakistan and American ground troops exchanged fire after Pakistani forces shot at the helicopters.” More here…
