Whitie for Obama

Here's some unexpected take on things:

Why White Supremacists Support Barack Obama

Inevitable II

More support for my assertions here. This is exactly what I have feared for years, why I supported the Iraq war as a bid to establish stability based on Western values, why I fear the consequences of foreign policies driven by what you hear from "liberals", and so on. But I'm afraid the die is cast.

If America now tries to pull back from the world stage, it will leave a dangerous power vacuum. The stabilizing effects of our presence in Asia, our continuing commitment to Europe, and our position as defender of last resort for Middle East energy sources and supply lines could all be placed at risk.

In such a scenario there are shades of the 1930s, when global trade and finance ground nearly to a halt, the peaceful democracies failed to cooperate, and aggressive powers led by the remorseless fanatics who rose up on the crest of economic disaster exploited their divisions. Today we run the risk that rogue states may choose to become ever more reckless with their nuclear toys, just at our moment of maximum vulnerability. -- Wall Street Journal, 21 Oct 08

There is no need to change the timing I have claimed for several years now, that a conflict to rival World War Two will occur around or shortly after 2020. The coming contractions, their effects on various national populations, and their historically-driven reactions, line right up.

Okay

The title got my attention. The article itself made me feel better.

Sarah Palin "Represents A Fatal Cancer To The Republican Party"

Why Worry

Just can't help it: that Ayers thing.

Obama's War

And I do not have a problem with it.

American liberals can't quite face the fact that if their man does win in November, and if he has meant a single serious word he's ever said, it means more war, and more bitter and protracted war at that—not less. -- Slate: Pakistan Is the Problem

Mere Personality

Here’s the thing: All four of them are qualified. All four of them, if landed in the hot seat, would do just as well as, possibly better than, the average of the forty three who went before.

The heat’s on Sarah right now. She’s not typical; she’s not safe. She doesn’t look like the others who went before. And she’s polarizing because she believes in things that people who believe in things either agree with passionately, or disagree with passionately. For my part, I stand with some of those things but not most of the others and I don’t care. She’s not the demagogue some on the left paint her as (check your facts, people), and our political system corrects for radicalism anyway. No worries.

The heat was on Barrack before and will continue. The right keeps on hysterically questioning his origins, his religious sensibilities, his commitment to good old fashioned Americanism. It’s all a bunch of panicky hogwash. Barry’s biography is emblematic of the sort of personality we like to read about in Presidential histories. He doesn’t have a lot of depth dealing with foreign policy issues but frankly, I don’t care anymore. Why not? Because just as in Bush’s first term, the next President’s first term will include events no one could have prepared for, and foreign policy “experience” (of which W had none anyway) will count for far less than guts and smarts and adaptability. Barrack fits the requirement.

No point commenting on John and Joe. They’re a pair of highly qualified old white guys from Washington.

So my point is I’m pretty much done with all the talk, the hand-wringing, the histrionics over this thing.

Two Different Views on the Palin Interview

Supportive: Certainty

Critical: Disinterest.

They don’t bother me

A lot of people are bothered by Palin. I’m not. Absent the fierce ambition that got her into that big white house in Juneau, she seems like a lot of people I’ve known. I disagree with some of her beliefs and philosophies, but I agree with others, and who cares anyway? She aims to be Vice President. Until McCain croaks, that doesn’t mean a lot more than being honorary mayor in a town run by the chamber of commerce. If he does, I sense her independent Christian and female instincts will work well within the Constitutional system, and things will turn out fine.

A lot of people are bothered by Obama. I’m not. Absent the admirably high self-esteem that got him through Chicago politics and enabled his reinvention into the image of a seemingly new kind of Senator, he seems like a lot of people I’ve known. I disagree with his standard left-Democrat positions on a lot of things, but so what? I grew up around folks just like him, and I understand them and him. So his wife wasn’t “proud” of America before. So he belonged to an avidly anti-white-America church. This is all old news where I come from and I grasp the multiple layers of political consciousness that such associations entail. He’s a great communicator and way too smart to become, say, another Carter. Under Obama, things will turn out fine.

A lot of people are bothered by Biden. I’m not. I wrote as if I was a few posts back, but I wasn’t serious, merely unimpressed. Other than the minor scandals that ended his earlier Presidential bids, I know nothing about him except as a sort of whipping boy for the occasional conservative editorialist. And even the most right-wing conservatives allow he’s an unfailingly decent man, well-versed in the practical realities of Washington, and I have to admit, he and Obama make a handsome pair. With Biden as President of the Senate, things will turn out fine.

A lot of people are bothered by McCain. I’m not. I don’t pretend to be overly impressed with his military record. He comported himself well, but I’m more interested in his decision to forego a path to the Admiralty and instead work with the politicians. Not sure what to make of that but his record does show independence and general good judgment. Current pundits’ juvenile use of the word “McSame” doesn’t sway me: It is extremely clear he has made compromises in order to get where he is, but we all know that the game changes once a President takes office, and in a relatively short time his fundamental character will outweigh any recent accommodations to the out-going Bush loyalists. Under McCain, things will turn out fine.

Different in each case. The two men as President will react quite differently to provocations from the real chess players out there – Russia, Iran, China – and will push somewhat different economic agendas. But I have faith in my country and in the promise of the future generally; and though I often characterize politicians as having a special species of the criminal mind, they don’t really bother me. Things’ll turn out fine.

Preparing the Battlefield

Seymour Hersh says Bush is bound and determined to stop Iran's military nuclear program. He seems to think that's a bad thing. It isn't. And no matter what his supporters say about it today, President Obama will be very glad his predecessor did this. I remember the Cold War and I'm just tired of that kind of shit. Let's take the fuckheads out now, whoever they are, while we still can, while the risk of incinerating millions of people is still relatively low. I honor Hersh for speaking up about My Lai and Abu Ghraib, but this is different. Covert ops were a major part of enabling the Soviet collapse. Let it continue. What's good for the U.S. is good for mankind. Now if only those fuckers in the press understood that and knew when to keep their fucking mouths shut.

Michelle

This blog is my vent. And at this moment, my rant is that they should leave Michelle Obama the fuck alone. She's her own person and entitled to be her own person. And she's not running for President. And she's hot. And people who go after the candidate's spouse are dickless fruitcakes with no judgment or decency. I'd love to see how they'd look under the same brutal spotlight. Not very pretty at all. I'm with these guys:

John McCain: "I've never met her, Mrs. Obama, she's a talented and a very effective person."

Barack Obama: "These folks should lay off my wife, all right?"

They Never Run Out of Stupid

Windfall profits tax? How in heaven's name is that supposed to correct the fuel prices? The oil companies have their cost and profit structures set up. They're not going to rebalance all of that in a panic over extra federal taxation. All they have to do is pass the tax on to the consumer and bang, the working poor are even more burdened and now they're additionally paying for some boneheaded federal redistribution scheme. I can't believe these people.

I mean, how does it address the problem? It doesn't, except to discourage people from driving, a choice most people can't make if they wish to keep their jobs. Trust a typical Senator not to get that. What we need long-term are incentives to develop alternatives but short-term, today, we need to increase domestic production. The entire problem really is as fundamental as they get: Oil is a resource, there isn't enough of it, and too much is on the hands of people who don't particularly like us. How the windfall profits tax people miss seeing that as the long painful prelude to an eventual global war is beyond me.

(And by the way, said war does not need a Republican cowboy to start it. People who blame saber-rattlers for precipitating warfare know nothing of history, nothing at all -- and are hence doomed to repeat it.)

Big diff

Someone explain to me the difference between stimulating the economy with give-backs and stimulating the economy with tax cuts! (Other than that tax cuts reward the productive while give-backs are more broadly spread -- not a smart way to invest, but it's only guv'ment money.)

I got no problem with Obama, especially if he listens to the party elders and toes a centrist line. Just quit with the bullshit that he's somehow different, that he's about change. Change is unavoidable -- it's making the right decisions in the midst of change that matters.

Force for Evil

Apparently more Europeans think we are a force for evil than a force for good. Right. We waged war on a country already devastated by one of history's worst dictators with the purpose of ending his reign, putting a halt to Palestinian blood money, and smashing a highly capable and motivated potential storefront for WoMDs of every type. Did we do it for territory? No. For oil? Only indirectly, as the region's oil wealth is what renders all other events there of such significance. Meanwhile the puir wee lads we hold at Guantanamo are in the main violent religious fanatics who would happily kill every hippie in California given half a chance, and who would have nothing to do with the rebuilding we do in Iraq and Afghanistan, nor the attempts we make to help the Middle East transform into a place whose people are actually served by government. What do the fucking French do besides sell them weapons? How much have they helped out in Myanmar relative to us? If they truly think we are a force for evil, they need to bend down and kiss our collective ass.

Why I'm not an Obamaniac

Iran not a "serious threat".

I could go further and rant on as to why I'm so impatient with the alleged progressives who think we are an empire and shouldn't be, but seriously, I need to remember that people with no sense of the links between culture, economics and war nor of the great sweep of history pose no serious threat and ignore 'em. (Unless they vote, I guess.)

Transporter

A Berkeley High grad and local junior college student wound up in a late-night frat fight and killed a UC engineering student.

It's tragic for everyone -- obviously the victim, but also the killer. He was just a kid like me, only better, because at only 20 he was already going to college. He had plans and a social life. Unfortunately he also had a knife.

Judgment will follow the natural question: Why did he have a knife?

I spent a lot of time out on the streets of Berkeley and Oakland after dark. To me it makes perfect sense that he had a knife. His drunken judgment to pull it is what must weight against him. Very possibly he found himself surrounded by a bunch of large and arrogant frat boys and reacted in fear and self-defense. Personally, I hope if that is the case, that is how the case is ruled.

Sometimes there is no good news.

Stories Untold

I really have nothing to say except this article just overflows with dramatic possibilities, stories either real or imagined that can be made to fit the facts as known, stories of lives led astray, men whose paths are never clear, and the overwhelming confusion of choices some folks are faced with every day, every hour. This article reminds me of my old dream of bringing these dusty suburbs to life through the power of story, these suburbs I fled to when Berkeley, unique little Berkeley, became just too cold. It also reminds me that no matter where you go, for some people life is simply fucked.

Democrat: Iraq Makes US More Vulnerable

The top Democrat on the House Armed Services panel says the Bush administration has not allocated sufficient resources to protect the nation from attack.

Missouri Democrat Ike Skelton said the effort in Iraq is preventing the U.S. from effectively preparing for other conflicts and putting at risk the United States' ability to defeat those most likely to attack. -- Mail.com / AP News

This is absolute bollocks. Iraq, however badly executed, is in fact an investment to prevent far worse conflicts in the future. Nor is it causing those conflicts to be worse. History shows repeatedly that perception of the rightness of a cause is closely tied to its success. Only if we cave in will history regard us as the evil perpetrators. Stay the course, allow Iraq to evolve as it is evolving, and we'll find it never led to the sort of attack the Democrat is speaking of.

Stubbing Out the Spirit

I'm sad that the Olympics have become so irrevocably politicized. It will be very unlikely henceforth for any Olympic Games to avoid descending into nationalist posturing and anti-nationalist protesting. Sure, China deserves a black eye. But the Olympic Spirit should be allowed to rise above all that and represent the striving and the discipline of the common man and woman turned athlete. We should try and ignore the specifics of any country involved, and simply celebrate a bringing together of disparate peoples.

Maybe, after this trend has run its course over the next half century or so, the Olympics can be decoupled from nationalism. Maybe, instead of countries and nations, the original Greek city-sates can find their modern representation in either countries or self-identified regions, with identification as an Olympic participant limited by a cap on population. Of course, this would encourage far more heated rivalries within countries than ever existed between them, but what the hell.

How We Eat Ourselves Alive

The country gets all wrapped up in the stupidest questions.

The Supreme Court meets today, to

clarify for the first time what the "the right to bear arms" means in the U.S. Constitution's second amendment.

Supporters of gun rights say the constitutional amendment is an endorsement of the individual's right to own a gun. But proponents of gun control laws say the "right to bear arms" refers to a state's right to have an armed militia. -- VOA, 18 Mar 08

So if you believe you are a liberal and thus enlightened enough to understand that the Second Amendment refers only to "well-organized" militias (i.e. the National Guard), tell me why the First Amendment doesn't apply only to well-organized (i.e. well-financed and state-sanctioned) media outlets? Why is the First an individual right if the Second is not?

The wording confuses some people.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

That is the wording passed by Congress. As ratified by the States, it is a little clearer.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Either way, the question is raised as to the relevance in the modern world. Our well-ordered and civil society, with its thorough courts and professional policemen and fringe of nuclear weapons, really doesn't need every man to be a Minuteman. In other words, we never again need to watch out for our neighbors. Trust the anonymous men in body armor, they are here for our protection.

Sorry, I get ahead of myself. I look at other countries and go, hmm, that could happen here some day. Obviously I'm crazy. Too much imagination. Should take a pill and sleep it off. Let's all just sleep. That's the ticket.

Lots of Yelling

The old home town was always good for random acts of entertainment.

The high school is right there next to the park and City Hall. If I was there, no doubt I'd join in just for the fun of it. Not sure which side, though. Whichever side the popular kids didn't join.

The World is Run by Con Men

From Opinion Journal, 31 Jan 08:

Man Without a Party
The New York Times uncovers a scandal involving a former president:

Late on Sept. 6, 2005, a private plane carrying the Canadian mining financier Frank Giustra touched down in Almaty, a ruggedly picturesque city in southeast Kazakhstan. Several hundred miles to the west a fortune awaited: highly coveted deposits of uranium that could fuel nuclear reactors around the world. And Mr. Giustra was in hot pursuit of an exclusive deal to tap them.

Unlike more established competitors, Mr. Giustra was a newcomer to uranium mining in Kazakhstan, a former Soviet republic. But what his fledgling company lacked in experience, it made up for in connections. Accompanying Mr. Giustra on his luxuriously appointed MD-87 jet that day was a former president of the United States, Bill Clinton.

Upon landing on the first stop of a three-country philanthropic tour, the two men were whisked off to share a sumptuous midnight banquet with Kazakhstan's president, Nursultan A. Nazarbayev, whose 19-year stranglehold on the country has all but quashed political dissent.

Mr. Nazarbayev walked away from the table with a propaganda coup, after Mr. Clinton expressed enthusiastic support for the Kazakh leader's bid to head an international organization that monitors elections and supports democracy. Mr. Clinton's public declaration undercut both American foreign policy and sharp criticism of Kazakhstan's poor human rights record by, among others, Mr. Clinton's wife, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

Less than 48 hours later, Giustra's company signed a deal giving it the rights to buy into three Kazakh uranium projects. Months later, Giustra secretly donated $31.3 million to Mr. Clinton's charitable foundations.

So, to what party does this Bill Clinton, and his wife the senator, belong? In 2,800 words, the Times never tells us. That can mean only one thing: not Republican.

Copyright © 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.

Prediction

What the hell. It's already late January.

It will be Clinton vs McCain, with McCain winning the Presidency.

This does not reflect a personal preference, nor a careful study of the candidates and issues. It's all gut.

Obama and Clinton are the only viable Democrats at this time. Edwards is too far behind and simply lacks the exciting appeal of being black or female. Of course, Obama and Clinton have solid messages as well but in this race, this year, the white boy is out of the running regardless. Obama will then falter, as more voters use Clinton's supposed experience and depth to excuse their distrust of a junior senator of a certain demographic.

The GOP likes McCain despite his lack of appeal amongst hard-core conservatives. They respect his service and his relatively unwavering positions. Huckabee will flame out soon, and McCain simply has more gravitas than the good-looking Mormon or the baggage-laden Mr. 9-11 -- and will be a safer bet against any Democrat.

Come November, uncertain times will compel many people to vote security -- not national security, on which Mrs. Clinton is sufficient, but at a personal level. They will waver between making history with a woman President, and holding off against what they perceive as personal weaknesses that a future female candidate might not share. McCain will seem at the time a safer choice, even if for many the real choice was subconsciously sexist.

I Have Spoken.

Gun Control Moment

"Two people had to lose their lives for me to be a hero. I'd never want this for me or anyone else." -- Sac Bee

A reminder that handguns are tools which, when not in the hands of idiots and criminals, serve a purpose all truly responsible adults understand. Much better, of course, that the man with the knife was properly treated, as evidently he was not. But failing that, he killed one too many and was without any doubt a danger to several more.