Election Nite USA

I'm not excited. Not like the massive throngs of people waiting on the edges of their seats to find out who will lead The Empire into its next chapter of "change" (however you want to define that).

My moment of relief will come when Bush leaves DC as the past president and Cheney disappears into Wyoming's ether - never to be heard from again unless it's from the defendant's chair in his war crimes trial.

Obama will most likely win. To not would be a nearly inexplicable defeat. But I've watched and listened and read him too much to believe or hope that "Yes We Can" is anything more than a very effective marketing slogan. What people think he can do and what he actually will do has yet to be seen. And I'll be watching.

**********************

11 pm ET - It's all over: OBAMA has won.

**********************
 

Sunday Food for Thought: How about a non-campaign?

Here's something to think about: considering how close Obama and McCain poll numbers are in the homestretch, would it have made any difference if they hadn't wasted hundreds of millions of dollars campaigning?

The elections since 2000 have shown that Americans are still almost evenly divided when it comes to sticking to their partisanship guns. I'd hypothesize that even if both of these candidates had just stayed home since they were both chosen as their party's picks for president, those poll numbers would be eerily similar, regardless.

Perhaps the most stunning aspect of the American public's behaviour these past 8 years is the fact that even though Bush's campaign of slashing and burning anything resembling democracy, the rule of law and decency, and the fundamentals of his own party have made him one of the most unpopular presidents ever, once again half of the voters see some redeeming quality in choosing a Republican representative who has overwhelmingly supported those policies as a logical and rational choice.

On the Democratic side, considering the embarrassingly low approval numbers of the Democratically-led congress and the failures and capitulation of Harry Reid and Nancy 'impeachment is off the table' Pelosi added to the centrist mantra Obama has been pushing while so many of his supporters think he's some kind of liberal in the true sense of the word, the cognitive dissonance is equally as palpable.

Overall then, would it have made any difference at all if this whole charade involved candidates who literally were a dog and a pony? I don't think so.

You have a Republican who's clumsily tried to convince people that he's not a Bush sockpuppet and a Democrat who really should have been able to muster an incredible amount of support - enough to have a huge lead in the polls at this point - after Dubya destroyed the country. Neither candidate has managed to deliver on their promise to bridge the partisan divide during this campaign and they have both run races that have mirrored the nastiness and shrillness of every other one before them. Why should we think that either of their presidencies will change that mood in the years to come?

America likes to consider itself as being on the cutting edge so, next time, why not take that to the limit - saving enormous amounts of money and the frazzled nerves of election watchers, journalists, pundits and bloggers (not to mention all of those train, bus, car and plane fumes) - and just have a non-campaign campaign? I'm sure the rest of us could find something else to do with our time (and sanity) until election day.
 

What about the poor?

When I read personal stories by Americans who have been hit hard by the economic meltdown like this, I can't help but have a visceral reaction to this type of obscene campaign spending:

Obama, who raised a record $150million in September, has bought ads just about everywhere – even in the virtual world of Xbox video games. At 8 p.m. tomorrow, he will run a 30-minute commercial on NBC, CBS and FOX. Cost: about $3million.

I know this race is still close and, with less than a week to go, getting the message out is crucial for both candidates but what would speak more loudly? Obama yapping on teevee for half and hour or donating that $3 million to charity to help the poor?

Oh but there's a payoff if he wins, his supporters will surely tell you. He plans to lower taxes for some 95% of working families which, as Bloomberg's article points out:

The ``working'' caveat turns out to be crucial: The nonpartisan Tax Policy Center estimates that, including tax filers with no wages or business income, 81 percent would get a tax cut.

Still, that sounds like good news, doesn't it? Perhaps until you try out a few examples on Obama's tax cut calculator. Let's say you're a single parent with 2 children and your adjusted gross income is $15,000. Your tax savings under Obama's plan would amount to $486.21 which, according to that site, is much more than the $18.69 you'd get under McCain. Quite the difference - but with the price of absolutely everything skyrocketing these days, how much of a difference would $486.21 make in that single parent's life? And don't they have the right to be just a little pissed off at this $3 million ad buy? And what about that $600 million Obama has spent on his campaign?

Having been a poor single parent, I can tell you exactly what it feels like to drown in financial depression while government decides to throw you a sponge as if that's some sort of a life-saving device.

I'm not letting McCain off the hook here - a man who can barely get the phrase "middle class" out of his mouth without choking on his spit. But I do expect more from a presidential candidate who calls himself a progressive and acts as if he alone will lift the struggling out of the stormy seas to stop them from perishing in this flood of financial ruin.

Sure, he has a tax plan (and don't get me started on his refusal to push for true universal health care) but, in these times when there's a global recession looming and he pledges to make more war in Afghanistan, just how much of his platform will he be able to accomplish? And if he's so focused on helping the middle class, what will happen to those who are already living below the poverty line? They seem to have been lost in all of this. Many of them have bought the "hope" and "change" messages and will cast their votes for Obama. But it seems, at this point, that's really all they have left. Frankly, it's just an insult to think that that's enough when the man they're voting for blows another $3 million to promote himself.
 

Attack in Syria: A Late October Surprise?

Lest we forget, as much as we may want to, Bush, Cheney and Gates are still busy plotting and carrying out various random attacks on sovereign countries while most of America is focused on the election and the accompanying financial crisis. I have to add though that, even if nothing else was happening, I suspect the majority of Americans wouldn't even blink at the fact that the US military has continually invaded Pakistan's territory in recent months and has now completed an air raid in Syria's boundaries. USA! USA! and all of that... The desire to win something, somewhere is overwhelming.

Depending on who you believe, the attack on Sunday either "killed a major smuggler of foreign fighters into Iraq" according to some anonymous "US official" and/or resulted in the deaths of 8 civilians.

Killing innocent people is a nasty habit the US military has yet to shake as it continually happens in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iraq - to list the countries that we know of where such "mistakes" involving "collateral damage" take place. We have no idea what other covert operations around the world might be "accomplishing" in this failed war on terror.

I don't think it's a stretch to see this latest US show of militarism in Syria as perhaps a signal favouring the election of Netanyahu over Livni after she admitted this week that she had failed to form a coalition government in Israel and was forced to call an election. Netanyahu has flatly stated that he has no interest in compromising to further the Israeli/Palestinian peace process (such as it is) and if Livni manages to win, media reports characterize the situation as having now delayed that process for at least a year.

While this certainly isn't a good outcome for Bush, who had expressed that he wanted to find some finality on the I/P issue - but who, in reality, along with Condi had stalled progress repeatedly for years - aggression towards Syria could serve as a favour to McCain. We'll have to see how or if he plans to handle this news if his campaign can manage to get the focus off of Palin's wardrobe (an issue she can't seem to let go of).

As Marc J. Sirois writing in Lebanon's Daily Star explains, after analyzing the futility of attacking Iran:

Then came another kind of "surprise." The global financial crisis that broke out earlier this month did not just damage McCain's campaign by exposing his fundamental (and openly acknowledged) ignorance on economic matters ahead of an era in which such abilities are likely to be at a premium. It also forced the US government to take on trillions of dollars in new liabilities in a bid to restore confidence in the markets. Given the gargantuan deficits and debt already amassed by Bush's profligate spending on wars against Muslims, tax breaks for the rich, and subsidies for large corporations, a costly war with Iran is simply no longer a viable option.

For all of these reasons, Syria must look like a more attractive target, especially if Washington can maintain a level of hostilities that is sufficient to pique the average American's "patriotism" but not so intense that it incurs significant costs. There is no guarantee, however, that the Syrians would cooperate with such an approach, even though any form of response in kind on their part would only invite the Americans to escalate disproportionately, especially with their overwhelming advantage in air power.

The ball seems to have gotten rolling in a Syrian village near the Iraqi border shortly before dusk on Sunday. According to Damascus, US troops arrived in helicopters and assaulted a building under construction at a farmstead, killing eight civilians - half of them children.

The Bush administration's official reaction has been painfully slow in coming, but according to an Associated Press report, a US military officer has confirmed that an attack was carried out by special forces. "We are taking matters into our own hands," AP quoted the officer as saying on condition of anonymity because of what the reporter described as the "political sensitivity" - no mention of patent illegality - "of cross-border raids." Pointedly, the comments came in Washington, not from an officer on the ground in Iraq, where the US military professed to be in the dark about the attack in Syria.
[...]
So why now? The timing has got to be instilling a sense of deja vu among senior members of the Syrian regime. They recall with consternation that even after US diplomats publicly acknowledged the value of Syrian intelligence assistance in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, Bush and other senior figures kept up their menacing rhetoric about Damascus. [even though they used Syria as a dumping ground for suspects they wanted tortured, like Canada's Maher Arar -catnip]

This looks to be different. Even if Damascus were still a target in Bush's so-called "war on terror," the timing is so vulnerable to accusations of an attempt to influence the election that only a dire threat could possibly justify taking the risk. Even if it turns out that what the Americans hit was indeed tied to the insurgency, therefore, hitting it now makes no sense - unless the real objective is to capture the hearts and minds of undecided voters in places like Ohio and Pennsylvania.

While Sirois "hope[s] that Obama wins the White House and then makes good on his promise as a conciliatory figure", Obama's fealty to AIPAC may supersede any possible progress with Syria's government on the I/P and Iraq war fronts. The Bush administration's decision to launch this latest attack has only complicated matters but hasn't that been its legacy around the world since day one?

No matter who wins the US election, the dangerously shifting sands in the Middle East will no doubt see the US government involved in extremely complex deliberations for years to come - especially once the Pentagon finally admits that military might is not the answer and that might not happen unless the US finally goes completely bankrupt. A new Great Depression might provide exactly the amount of humility needed to finally reach that point.

But who am I kidding?

Update:

Baghdad condemns 'US Syria raid'

Speaking after a Baghdad cabinet meeting on Tuesday, Iraqi government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh also explicitly criticised the US over the unconfirmed helicopter strike.

"The Iraqi government rejects the US helicopter strike on Syrian territory, considering that Iraq's constitution does not allow its land to be a base for launching attacks on neighbouring countries," he said.

 

10 More Days

I have to hand it to you - you yanks are a colourful and eclectic bunch. How else could you possibly stand election campaigns that last almost 2 bloody years? As a voyeur from the frozen tundra above, gazing down (and over at Alaska) from a place where eating poutine while watching Hockey Nite in Canada on a Saturday is aboot as exciting as it gets (according to every known Canuck stereotype) and being one of basically a handful of ye frozen people who actually puts up with covering our 37 day federal election campaign in any detail (and believe me, 37 days is more than enough), I know that it takes a special kind of political junkie (and I do mean "special") to sustain an interest in a race between 2 American parties that are virtually the same (in too many ways) for any length of time.

Rah rah patriotism, character flaws magnified and examined to the nth degree - sort of a colonoscopy of the mind, if you will, hundreds of millions of dollars spent on the US election industry (probably more than the entire economies of some small countries and certainly enough to eventually end world hunger), promises, promises, promises - just waiting to be broken, wild-eyed partisans who for some insane reason "love" their candidates and who are willing to do practically anything to get them elected, weary-eyed extremely monotonous pundits and journalists from hell who actually think they contribute something of worth to the national conversation; and stump speeches - spoken and shown over and over and over and over again by candidates who, after all of that oratory, still need teleprompters to guide them when most of their followers could recite their words verbatim for them.

It's a modern-day traveling circus: freaks and snake-oil salesmen included, not to mention the revival tent set up on the side for those who may have strayed from The Way (or The One). The curious are drawn in and suckered, leaving with smiles on their faces but feeling vaguely ripped off at the same time - prepared to shrug that off because they need to believe that they actually got value for their money. And besides, maybe it'll be better the next time. (But it never really is, is it?)

Just 10 more days...and then it starts all over again. Enjoy the show.
 

The US VP Debate: Cleanup on Aisle 4!

Well, if I ever wanted to know what it feels like to have someone wearing a permanently-plastered smile stab me in the back while pouring a bucket of sickly- sweet syrup on me, I certainly experienced that while watching the US vice presidential candidates' debate.

Is it too much to ask that a potential vice president not use phrases like "you betcha!", "darn right!" and words like "gettin'"? And exactly how does "doggone it" translate into Hebrew, for example? "Oy vey"? I can just see Sarah Palin on the Middle East peace mission circuit now. She'd drive the translators insane. You betcha!

There's no doubt that Palin appealed to that segment of the US population known fondly as Airhead-Americans and that you could hear one gigantic sigh of relief across the country from Republicans once the debate was over. You could tell she's been well-schooled this past week. Her repetition of right-wing talking points showed us that - and her stubborn refusal to answer some questions while so obviously steering her answers back to topics she was most comfortable with reminded me of a tractor pull at a country fair.

Oh, she has "folksy" down. But haven't Americans had just about all of the folksy they can put up with after 8 years of George "the guy you want to have a beer with" Bush? And considering the fact that she has no problem with the overwhelming power grab made by Bush's VP, can we call her Cheney in a Dress now? Let's just hope she doesn't end up shooting somebody in the face (and making him apologize for it later).

Joe Biden won the debate just by keeping his cool (repressing his infamous Inner Angry Joe), not jumping out from behind his podium in response to her inanity and managing to hold back any comment resembling "Jane, you ignorant slut".

I need a shower.

Related:

What? You wanted substance?

Check out the WaPo's Fact Checker and FactCheck.org for that stuff. I have a Canadian leaders' debate to watch now.

And here's the transcript and video. (Don't stare into her eyes for too long. You were warned.)
 

It's Survivor Nite!

Here's what my teevee schedule looks like tonite (in CST - catnip standard time):

6:00 - Survivor: Gabon (the actual reality show)

7:00 - Survivor: US VP debate (If Sarah Palin can prove that she's smarter than a sack of hammers and/or shows up with her hunting rifle, she'll have won.)





11:00 - Survivor: Canadian Leaders' English language debate rerun (Will Sweater Vest Steve show up again tonite or will we see Regular Narcissistic "It's all the Liberals' Fault" Steve? - or both?)
 

Video: She who might be the next VP...

COURIC: Why isn't it better, Governor Palin, to spend $700 billion helping middle-class families who are struggling with health care, housing, gas and groceries; allow them to spend more and put more money into the economy instead of helping these big financial institutions that played a role in creating this mess?

PALIN: That's why I say I, like every American I'm speaking with, were ill about this position that we have been put in where it is the taxpayers looking to bail out. But ultimately, what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the health-care reform that is needed to help shore up our economy, helping the—it's got to be all about job creation, too, shoring up our economy and putting it back on the right track. So health-care reform and reducing taxes and reining in spending has got to accompany tax reductions and tax relief for Americans. And trade, we've got to see trade as opportunity, not as a competitive, scary thing. But one in five jobs being created in the trade sector today, we've got to look at that as more opportunity. All those things under the umbrella of job creation. This bailout is a part of that.

Yikes! Move over Miss Teen South Carolina.

Fareed Zakaria:

Will someone please put Sarah Palin out of her agony? Is it too much to ask that she come to realize that she wants, in that wonderful phrase in American politics, "to spend more time with her family"?

 

McCain Suspends Campaign

John McCain has announced that he's suspending his campaign to go back to DC to work on the financial meltdown. He's also called for Friday's debate in Mississippi to be canceled/delayed.

Politically, this could go one of two ways. Either McCain will be seen as being a "leader" for making such a bold gesture (suspending his campaign) or he'll look like he's running away from the race and the debate (which I don't think should be canceled/delayed, regardless).

McCain said he is calling on President Bush "to convene a meeting with the leadership from both houses of Congress, including Senator Obama and myself. It is time for both parties to come together to solve this problem."

Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton released a statement reacting to the news.

"At 8:30 this morning, Senator Obama called Senator McCain to ask him if he would join in issuing a joint statement outlining their shared principles and conditions for the Treasury proposal and urging Congress and the White House to act in a bipartisan manner to pass such a proposal," Burton said. "At 2:30 this afternoon, Senator McCain returned Senator Obama's call and agreed to join him in issuing such a statement. The two campaigns are currently working together on the details."

Meanwhile, Paulson and Bernanke are testifying in front of the house financial services committee this afternoon. Online on C-SPAN3.

Paulson: "I'm not looking for extraordinary power."

Excuse me?

Sec. 8. Review.

Decisions by the Secretary pursuant to the authority of this Act are non-reviewable and committed to agency discretion, and may not be reviewed by any court of law or any administrative agency.

More to come, obviously...

Update:

Video of McCain's announcement -



Unofficial Obama campaign response: 'The Debate is On'

Apparently, Obama will be debating himself. Nothing new there (flip flops). Or maybe he could debate Biden since Joe seems to think he's been running against Obama again lately.

Update:

Obama press conference: "I believe we should continue to have the debate."

I'll post a link to the transcript and/or the video when it's available.

The debate commission says 'Game on!' despite McCain's request.

Update:

Video of Obama on the debate issue -