President Obama

Not superman but for better or worse he is American President

A few final thoughts on the election of Barack Obama, before we start turning to "real life" again:

1) Whatever one thinks of him, he appears to have won a genuine mandate from the majority of American people. This was no "landslide" as some are calling it. At least 52 % to 47 % is not a landslide in my book. You don't have to look far back to find bigger margins in the popular vote. 1996 saw 49 % to 40 % in Clinton against Dole. Nonetheless the margin was sufficient to make all reported cases of local incidents of intimidation and fraud (as I noted yesterday) not relevant to the overall final result.

2) It is a significant milestone to have a black President (in not wishing to totally forget that he happened to have a white mother !). America leads the world in opportunities for its minority groups. A black Democrat president follows on from two black Republican Secretaries of State. This is the culmination of a wider trend. This shows to be a myth the allegation that America is a particularly "racist country". Instead we should reflect that America is unique in having a minority ethnic group leader. It is difficult to see the same happening in other countries with significant minority groups. There is no sign this will happen anytime soon in Brazil, Canada, France, Australia or Britain to name just a few.

3) His biggest obvious strength by a mile is oratory. His other talents are unproven.

4) His policies are vague and tend towards the "redistribution of wealth" rather than the creation of wealth. He has made trade protectionist noises. If these two traits are reflected in the reality of his policy it would be bad news for the American and world economies.

5) His promises to reduce military expenditure are unfortunate in their timing when the world needs a stronger American military more than ever. Which other nation can stand up to oppressors on the continent of Obama's father ?(Congo and Somalia are pressing issues with the latter a base for Islamic militants so presenting security as well as humanitarian concerns). Which other nation can subdue potential threats from Iran,keep the lids on Iraq and Afghanistan and prevent total collapse in Pakistan ? Which other nation can act as a counter weight to a resurgent Russia that today announced it was moving missiles to the Polish border ? Which other country will deter any crazy actions from North Korea under its ailing leader ?
All these issues are threats to people around the world and ultimately to us all. We would do well to think a little more widely before cheering in a leader promising "Change" and not much else.


6) His regime will be strong but not completely unfettered. The Republicans will control over 40 seats in the Senate so may have some chance of delaying or curbing any plans that are too damaging.

7) He has two years to prove himself before America's next major vote in the mid-term elections in 2010.

Finally, he is not the candidate I preferred but this is not the first time I have supported the losing side in an election (I suspect it won't be the last either !). For now he is President Elect of the USA and there is nothing else to do than wish him success and hope he proves his doubters' worst fears wrong. He has two years with an enviably free hand to achieve something great for his country and the world. What he does in that time will prove his real character and motives once and for all.

I hope my worst doubts on Obama are proved wrong

There is a lot of detail still to come but the numbers look like Obama has won.

I am not putting up with Dimblebore on the BBC anymore !

I just hope his powers are not completely unfettered by the Senate.

There will no doubt be a lot of froth in the press tomorrow. Give it two years and I think we will have a more realistic picture.

Night Shift

I am staying up for a while to follow the US results. I have work in the morning but these seem times and events of sufficient importance to warrant a bit of lost sleep.

I am not sure if I can face a smug "Dimblebore" on the BBC so I am following events online for now. It is actually possible to get a wider more balanced picture by switching between various mainstream news providers and other blogs etc.

I will turn in either once the result becomes clear or if it all gets too depressing !

Will Rove be proved right ?

The architect of the Bush election victories, Karl Rove is predicting a clear if not landslide Obama win.

I think my views on Obama are fairly clear from previous entries. There are some ludicrously inflated expectations of what his election will bring. That will mean a lot of very disappointed people within a year or so.

Obama's own policies, such as they are, are all about redistribution of wealth by raising taxes. If he sticks to this, it can only be bad news for the US and by extension world economy.

Any reduction in the US military will be a green light to aggressors and tyrants the world over. I certainly don't see any candidates from Europe for the role of world policeman.

All in all, I find the prospect of Obama bad news. A dangerous cocktail of wildly inflated expectations coupled with policies that may weaken the last superpower do not inspire me. I am therefore struggling to understand why so many welcome the election of Obama.

In fact I hope that this time Mr. Rove will be wrong !

Free and Fair Election ?

Maybe not in Philadelphia. A side the BBC and CNN may not show. Here a couple of Black Panthers "stand guard" outside a polling station. They are challenged by a rather brave concerned citizen complete with his camera phone:

Naive and Delusional

If Obama wins tonight, here is one of his many supporters who will experience a dose of reality in the coming months.

She believes that Barack Obama will help her pay for her "gas and mortgage".

How do people manage to get so deluded ?!

Turkeys voting for Christmas ?

That is the simplest analogy I can think of.

America's strength has in the past been based on a low tax, deregulated economy where those who work hard are rewarded while those who don't may struggle.

Obama's policies, such as they are, all seem aimed at rolling back these areas of strength , not to mention weakening the military and in the process giving a freer hand to potential tyrrants the world over. Who else will challenge them ?

If Obama wins tomorrow, I can sincerely say that I hope my worst fears will be proved wrong. There is no pride in being right when predicting disaster.

America needs a socialist-based,redistribution of wealth model like a hole in the head.

Whatever Obama's strengths of oratory and the potential to make history, his lack of experience combined with notions of wealth redistribution make a vote for him like a turkey voting for Christmas.

The Terminator and a glimmer of hope

At the eleventh hour there is a glimmer of hope that America can avoid some of the European diseases like mass ranks of welfare recipients living as clients of an ever growing state. Despite the silver tongued words of Barak Obama, that is in essence what he seems to promise: higher taxes, a scaled down military and a much enlarged welfare state dedicated to "the redistribution of wealth".

While all serious commentators seem to agree on the result of the Presidential election, the polls do seem to be narrowing. Now at the eleventh hour a poll gives John McCain a lead in Ohio. This is signifcant as this state has been won by the winning side in every election since 1960.

If McCain wins Ohio on Tuesday (and if he also wins the presidency as well) I feel that in no small part will he owe something to "the Terminator" or Arnold Schwarzenegger. He gave a good humoured, uplifting speech with clear reasons why Obama will be bad news for America (and by extension the world). There is a chance, albeit far from certain that a corner has been turned. His speech can be seen below:

Will President Obama be a disaster or just a disappointment to his own supporters ?

With many commentators now predicting that the election of President Obama, is a foregone conclusion, it is probably worth noting a few points about the man who could effectively be "the most powerful man on the planet" from next week.



Nothing I have read, and I have read fairly widely, gives me a serious idea about what policies he is proposing other than some broad outlines. The broad outlines, I frankly find disturbing especially in the troubled times we live in.


My summary of the broad outlines Obama has revealed are as follows:



1) Raise taxes and increase spending. Hardly inspirational in times like these when the economies of the world are so fragile. The Wall Street Jounal summarised his tax plans like this:

2) Introduce trade protectionism- not a particularly positive plan at a time of world recession.

3) Withdraw US troops from Iraq. On examination this amounts to a little more than a discussion over timing so is hardly a radical proposal, whether right or wrong.

Obama's only clear message is "change" without any definition of what this change really is. Worse still, most of his supporters do not seem to have any clear idea what this change is about except that it must be something good. This is to imagine that change in itself is always good which seems very dangerous. Surely the leaders who have caused the most change were the most revolutionary or brutal. Hitler and Stalin certainly brought about a lot of change.

Obama's most obvious skill is his ability to speak. This seems unarguable to me. By extension this could be seen as an ability to inspire. However without clear plans or with some undesirable broad outlines, this seems no reason to elect him.

Perhaps most telling is a story being reported by today's Telegraph referring to a 2001 radio interview Obama gave when he spoke positively of the need for "redistributive change". That can mean many things but what he seemed to be saying was that it was not enough for the courts to do this but that legislation would be required.

Here are some extracts from the interview:

So one possibility is that Obama will be elected on the basis of some vague emotional notion of "change" to introduce redistributive based legislation and taxation at a time of global recession. That seems a recipe for disaster.

The other option is for him to be another Tony Blair and be elected to the cheering screams of his most extreme supporters only to be remarkably unradical and in the process alienate most the people who first supported him. This may also be possible and certainly has its precedent ! It is possible to imagine in that scenario that in 4 years he is viewed as little different from a black CEO of a major corporation and the most ardent critics will be the signifcant number of black voters who supported him but feel nothing has changed for them.

However the option to be most worried about is an increase in taxation and legislation to support redistribution of wealth (as described in his radio interview). At a time of global recession not even the Liberal Democrats are proposing that.

So unless there is a surprise next week I will not be joining the majority view in cheering the result. I will be quietly worried as to what Obama change really means. I will be watching with concerned interest.

New to the job since 1973

I have deliberately been keeping my powder fairly dry on the US elections. Ultimately, despite the importance of the result to the wider world, this is a matter for Americans to decide. Past embarrasments, notably the Guardian readers' campaign to make the voters of Clark County, Ohio vote for John Kerry in 2004, should act as a reminder against "meddling" in overseas elections. (For the record, the Guardian initiative was spectacularly unsuccessful and Clark County along with the rest of Ohio voted for Bush. See this link for some hilarious responses to the letters received from do-gooding Guardian readers !)

Nonetheless we do seem to hear more about the US elections than we sometimes do about our own elections and if nothing else they make a great spectacle and story. For one thing they last so long compared to our own which can be over in about a month since the day they are called.

Below is a short clip of the man "a heartbeat away from the Presidency" on the Democrat side, one Senator Joe Biden. A special connection with British politics is his rare distinction for plagorising a speech by Neil Kinnock. If you have to plagorise, surely it would be a good start to find someone worth plagorising !

Anyway below is Mr. Biden asking a wheelchair bound Senator to stand up. Senator Biden like his role model, Neil Kinnock has a long history of gaffes. He compounds this gaffe by giving the excuse (around 0.30 on the clip) that he is "new to this". New to what ? He's been a Senator since 1973 !!

A storm in a turban

I personally think too much is being made of the alleged smear campaign against Barak Obama by circulating a photo of him in traditional Somali dress (including Turban). Alarmingly I find myself agreeing with the Clinton campaign (a first time for everything !) that how can it be insulting for someone to be pictured wearing a national costume unless you devalue that nationality in the first place.

As seen above, our very own HRH Prince Charles is no stranger to unusual costume- although he's not wanting to run the country just yet !

I think the concerns over Obama are different and much deeper than unusual costumes.

For some reasons the Times has broken ranks from the media pack on at least 2 occasions to run critical articles on him.

This one deserves a read regarding the hidden funding from an Iraqi Billionaire given to the man who may well be the next president of the world's only superpower:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3433485.ece

Mansion 'mistake' piles the pressure on Barack Obama

James Bone in New York and Dominic Kennedy in London

A British-Iraqi billionaire lent millions of dollars to Barack Obama's fundraiser just weeks before an imprudent land deal that has returned to haunt the presidential contender, an investigation by The Times discloses.

The money transfer raises the question of whether funds from Nadhmi Auchi, one of Britain’s wealthiest men, helped Mr Obama buy his mock Georgian mansion in Chicago.

A company related to Mr Auchi, who has a conviction for corruption in France, registered the loan to Mr Obama's bagman Antoin "Tony" Rezko on May 23 2005. Mr Auchi says the loan, through the Panamanian company Fintrade Services SA, was for $3.5 million.

It's worth reading on at the link above. All in all, mysterious loans from shady foreign businessmen doesn't sound very "new politics" to me....

Rather childish but.......

with backers like this, you have to wonder. Here Senator Edward "Chappaquiddick" Kennedy makes an awkward slip of the tongue in referring to Barack Obama.