Archive for the ‘US’ Category

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Is it fear of Saudi Arabia which stops Obama from calling it “Islamic” terror?

June 12, 2016

The Orlando mass murderer called 911 to claim allegiance to ISIS before the massacre.

IS have come out with a statement claiming responsibility. They declared 3 days ago that they would target Florida.

The shooter, Omar Saddiqui Mateen, was an Afghani American and a Muslim. His father reckons religion had nothing to do with the massacre. Just a coincidence no doubt – again. He was also a Florida registered Democrat. He was also being watched by the FBI. Not many Muslims are terrorists but a remarkably large number of terrorists  (currently) are Shia Muslims. And that is not entirely coincidence.

And still Barack Obama cannot bring himself to call it “Islamic” terror.

Politico:

President Barack Obama on Sunday declared the worst mass shooting in U.S. history “an act of terror and an act of hate.”

“Today, as Americans, we grieve the brutal murder, a horrific massacre, of dozens of innocent people,” Obama said Sunday. “We pray for their families, who are grasping for answers with broken hearts. We stand with the people of Orlando, who have endured a terrible attack on their city.”

“Although it’s still early in the investigation, we know enough to say that this was an act of terror and an act of hate, and as Americans we are united in grief, in outrage and in resolve to defend our people,” he continued. 

A man armed with a handgun and an assault rifle rampaged through a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida, early Sunday, killing at least 50 people and leaving more than 50 hospitalized.

The shooter was identified as Omar Saddiqui Mateen, who died in a gunfight with SWAT officers after initially firing shots into the club and eventually taking hostages.

The death toll is now upto 53. still 50 but some of the injured are in an acute condition.

I note that Saudi Arabia blackmailed the UN and Ban Ki-Moon into removing the Saudi-led coalition from the blacklist of organisations committing atrocities against children in Yemen. I note that the CIA now states – under Saudi pressure – that confidential documents will absolve Saudi Arabia of any involvement with 9/11. That may technically be correct as far as the government of Saudi Arabia is concerned, but it was Saudi money and Saudi nationals led by a Saudi fanatic who were involved.

Is it fear of Saudi Arabia (and the undoubted Saudi based support for ISIS and other Shia fanatics) which stops Obama from calling Islamic terror Islamic? Even when it is? Or is it his fear of being considered an Islamophobe?

 

Tags:,
Posted in Politics, Religion, US | Comments Off on Is it fear of Saudi Arabia which stops Obama from calling it “Islamic” terror?

Clinton versus Trump is the Bad versus the Ugly …

June 10, 2016

The Good is nowhere to be seen.

Of course, there may be some good among the bad and what is ugly is not necessarily all bad, but it must be immensely frustrating for US voters that the choice available is as impoverished as it is.

How Presidential candidates appear during the election is not a very good indicator of their performance. Ronald Reagan reduced expectations to those of a bad B-movie script, but ended up changing, and charging up, the mood in the country. Barack Obama raised expectations for all that he said he could but his Presidency has become a litany of all that he could not (did not).

So it is not impossible for Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump to be great Presidents, but the signs are less than promising.

Still, it should be a fascinating contest with real entertainment value. I hardly watch and am no expert on how Big Brother functions, but my perception is that it is not “niceness” that wins. In fact, my perception is that ugliness is prized. Maybe Trump has shifted the battle to be an ugliness contest and has an advantage. But shrewishness also wins and wins big.

The Ugly Beast versus the Bad Shrew.

The Good is noticeable by its absence.

 

Tags:,
Posted in Politics, US | Comments Off on Clinton versus Trump is the Bad versus the Ugly …

Obama, Clinton, media slam Trump, and Trump support will probably rise

June 2, 2016

This week has seen a concerted, seemingly coordinated, attack by Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and the establishment press on Trump and Trump University. If my theory, that Trump is riding an anti-establishment wave which feeds on attacks from the establishment, is correct, this will lead to an increase in Trump’s numbers. This will show up in next week’s polls.

The anti-establishment wave could, if fed enough energy by the media attacks on Trump, turn into an anti-establishment tsunami. I find it amazing that the NYT, WaPo, LA Times, HuffPo …. have not picked up on the reality that it is their “over the top” attacks on Trump which are energising and feeding his support. The content of their attacks has become irrelevant. It is their contempt which is creating a magnified reaction. The more the establishment seem to be “ganging up” on him, the greater the reaction. I see an analogy with the vibrational collapse of a bridge when troops march across in step and cause a resonance failure. As media attacks on Trump seem more coordinated, the anti-establishment reaction could reach resonance and become an uncontrollable tsunami.

Obama’s stuttering attack was particularly unconvincing and gives some backing to the suggestion that “Barack Obama as your enemy is equivalent to having a thousand friends”. 

(ISIS might agree. I note that the Iraqi (with US air support) assault on Fallujah has stalled. Massive advance publicity was released about the assault but it has been somewhat less effective than when Syria (with Russian air support) has taken back ISIS strongholds.)

https://youtu.be/mSxo9-Z5Ki0

In the meantime Clinton does not seem able to finally kill off Sanders. In line-ups against Trump, Sanders consistently does much better than Clinton. I take this as being consistent with the angry, anti-establishment wave which transcends “left” or “right”.

 

Tags:, ,
Posted in Behaviour, Media, Politics, US | 2 Comments »

Would Clinton or Trump be better for a global economic recovery?

May 31, 2016

After 8 years of an American Democrat administration the recovery from the global financial crisis of 2008 has still not gathered steam. Europe, with its EU chains, is no longer capable of leading a global economic recovery. (I note that the UK or Germany could have played a bigger part in a global recovery if they were each unhampered by EU membership). China and India, together and if their economies were in phase, could also have led a recovery. But the Chinese growth story has stalled and is out of phase with the Indian growth. The US certainly could have, and could still, lead a recovery. But Barack Obama has been too risk averse (read too scared) to take any real leadership role. So while the US is recovering, very slowly, it has not really contributed to being the global economic motor it could be. The primary reason, of course, is that public spending is much too high and, in consequence, taxes are higher than necessary. Obama has elected to print money (quantitative easing) rather than attempting to get the fundamentals right. The EU is still printing money and public spending is little less than profligate. Spain and Portugal are next after Greece and France is not very healthy. They are all pursuing traditional socialist policies of trying to get out of the economic hole by increasing public spending (with newly printed money of reducing value). And with the structure of the EU being what it is, they hold back the countries which have much sounder fundamentals.

The question is, who of Clinton or Trump would contribute more to a global recovery?

Certainly public spending would be higher with Clinton than with Trump. Public infrastructure spending – which is now necessary in the US – would probably be more likely with Clinton. But her choice would be to print money or to increase taxes. Obama took the easy way out and printed money. Whether Clinton would have the nerve to either cut non-infrastructure spending or to raise taxes is uncertain. She may not dither like Obama, but she is not any less risk-averse. Assuming she did increase taxes, she would probably increase corporate rather than personal taxation and that is always a “growth killer”.  Small businesses would be hard hit. As Europe has demonstrated so well, minimum wage legislation only destroys – for ever – the entry-level and low-qualification jobs. Clinton will find minimum wage legislation tempting and may fall into the trap of destroying jobs. There seems little chance that a Clinton administration would contribute any more to a global recovery than Obama has.

What Trump might or might not do is uncertain. It is possible that he might address the fundamentals and really reduce the size of the bureaucracy. Or he may increase defence spending and try to balance the books by cutting welfare spending. He could take the measures to help small businesses and it is here, with small businesses, that real growth and wealth creation is generated. Or he may just help the large corporations which creates fewer jobs and favours the wealthiest.

The Clinton path will be “more of the same”. Not much to gain but probably not much worse than with Obama. The Trump path is unknown. It has a much larger upside than anything Clinton has to offer, but it has a much larger downside as well. A Trump path is full of risks. If the economic downsides with a Trump Presidency could be limited and he helped small businesses more than large corporates, then he could contribute to a global revival which Clinton would be incapable of. But the risk is significant.

I remain of the opinion that The US choice is now high risk with Trump or low gain with Clinton. 

 

 

Tags:, ,
Posted in Politics, US | Comments Off on Would Clinton or Trump be better for a global economic recovery?

Trump leads — is it a perversion of democracy?

May 24, 2016

Donald Trump leads – just – in the polls and there is some panic. The RCP poll of polls shows Trump leading Clinton for the first time by just 0.2 percentage points (43.4 to 43.2).

Trump leads 22nd May 2016

Trump leads 22nd May 2016

But this support for Trump is not reflected in the US media. Overwhelmingly – and I would guess over 90% – of the main stream media are contemptuous of Trump. The liberal media is filled with anti-Trump vitriol. (These attacks are counter productive and I have written elsewhere of how Trump and the anti-establishment wave he is riding feed on these attacks). The consensus even among my friends – who do reflect the media – is that a Trump victory would be a catastrophe for the US and the world. Trump supporters are considered fools or worse. They are supposed to be the racists and the rednecks and all the stupid and “angry” people.

The US media attacks on Trump show a hint of panic (especially the liberal-left media). They are still missing the point that attacking Trump increases his support. It is only by adopting an anti-establishment stance that some of this support could be siphoned away.

Suppose Trump does win the election. Will the media and the establishment accept the “verdict of the people”? Will they still be extolling the virtues of democracy and universal suffrage where the stupid have as much of a vote as the intelligent? I suspect that Trump will not be as bad a President as people fear. But if he wins, it will be because of the inherently, perverse nature of democracy.

The basic problem is that “universal suffrage” with an “equal vote” for everyone is fundamentally unjust.

……. it is mere existence as an individual that suffices to have an “equal vote”. And if everyone has the vote it is assumed that “democracy” has been attained – as if it were some sort of state of grace.  The only real criterion is that of age, even if some countries still have some other criteria in force. The merit of the individual is irrelevant. Votes can and are bought by promises or by free meals or by money or by a bus-ride. A “bought” or coerced vote weighs as heavy as one that is freely given. (There is nothing wrong in buying or selling votes – the flaw lies in that the seller has a vote equal to that of free elector). A fool has the same vote as a wise man. A large tax contributor is equated to a small tax contributor. Government servants paid for by taxes have the same weight of vote as the tax payers. Priests and politicians have the vote. The behaviour of an individual does not affect his vote. Experience, intelligence, wisdom, competence or criminality are all considered equally irrelevant. A majority vote is considered to be the “will of the people” where “constitutions” are supposed to prevent excesses against minorities. But constitutions are subject to the same majority vote. One hundred and one idiots take precedence over one hundred wiser men. And we inevitably get the politicians that universal suffrage deserves. This democracy and its universal suffrage needs also to be tempered by merit. But meritocracy smacks of elitism and no self-respecting socialist could tolerate that.

Universal Suffrage which ignores merit has led to the Lowest Common Factor becoming what counts and not the Highest Common Multiple that is being sought. And that was not, I think , what Lincoln intended.

Perhaps what is needed is a differential vote. Every one would have a basic vote but extra fractions of a vote could be earned for merit – for intelligence, for service, for wealth creation, … . It is probably time for “democracy” to shift towards a “meritocracy”.

 

Tags:, ,
Posted in Behaviour, Politics, US | Comments Off on Trump leads — is it a perversion of democracy?

Hillary Clinton’s tweeter doesn’t understand Venn diagrams

May 22, 2016

I don’t suppose Hillary Clinton does it herself. I am sure she has a small army of bright young tweeters to help her engage socially.

This is the meaningless (to be kind – but incredibly stupid to be accurate) Venn diagram she tweeted about gun control.

clinton tweet

clinton tweet

The US has a population of 324 million (April 2016) and an adult population of about 240 million. Only about 160 million are registered to vote. Perhaps about 120 million will vote in the November election. So the next President will be elected with about 60 million votes (less than 20% of the population he or she will represent).

Surely the US could have produced two better candidates then Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.

 

Tags:,
Posted in Politics, US | 1 Comment »

Washington Post “promotes” video of Clinton lying

May 19, 2016

That somebody has made a montage of clips about Hillary Clinton’s untruthful statements over a number of years is not – in itself – so newsworthy or surprising. A Youtube video was posted in January this year. That such a video is promoted by the Drudge report is also not very surprising.

But I think it is a little surprising that the Washington Post (via Kathleen Parker) has helped this video to go viral is a little surprising. That a similar video of Donald Trump could be produced is certain. But why would the WaPo effectively help the Trump camp? Why now? The WaPo oped certainly has reached parts of the Democratic body corpus that other beers cannot reach. Of course the WaPo is far to the left of Hillary Clinton and they will do what they can to help Bernie Sanders. But even Sanders’ most ardent supporters cannot give him much of a chance.

Hillary Clinton’s vast resume of, shall we say, inconsistencies, is the dog that caught the car and won’t let go. A viral video collection of her comments on various subjects through the years is bestirring Republican hearts.

To those who’d rather vote for a reality show host than a Clinton, the video merely confirms what they’ve believed all along. For independents and even Democrats, it’s a reminder of how often Clinton has morphed into a fresh incarnation as required by the political moment.

Most of the highlights would be familiar to anyone who follows politics — her varying takes on Bosnia, health care, Wall Street, NAFTA — but the juxtaposition of these ever-shifting views is more jarring than one might expect. Politicians count on Americans’ short attention spans (and memories) as much as they do their own policies and/or charms. This video (https://youtu.be/-dY77j6uBHI), inartfully titled “Hillary Clinton lying for 13 minutes straight,” clarifies blurred recollections and recasts them in an order that, among other things, reminds us how long the Clintons have been around.

The video is worth watching in its own right: Hillary Clinton lying for 13 minutes straight

 

 

Tags:
Posted in Behaviour, Politics, US | Comments Off on Washington Post “promotes” video of Clinton lying

Trump does not need the GOP as much as they need him

May 11, 2016

Reuters’ rolling poll on the Trump/Clinton battle now becomes something to monitor. It is still early days, but the Reuters’ poll suggests that things are much closer than the headlines in the US media over the last few days. I begin to think that many of the stories in the liberal/left media are more wishful thinking rather than any real understanding. In fact, nobody still quite understands why Trump is riding as high as he is. Trump seems to be within 1 percentage point of Clinton rather than the tens of percentage points difference that some were quoting just a week ago.

RR 10 May

RR 10 May

I see no reason to change my opinion that this is an anti-establishment wave where the content of what Trump has to say is less important than how “anti-establishment” he is perceived to be. And that perception is directly related to how many establishment figures (including the media) are attacking him. Headlines against Trump in the Washington Post or Huffington Post or NYT are just as effective as attack speeches by GOP establishment figures in solidifying his support.

Chaos within the GOP is not necessarily a bad thing for Trump. In fact, visible opposition from establishment Republicans is probably a good thing for him. The GOP needs a Trump to rally around to keep the Party relevant, much more than Trump needs establishment GOP support to woo the electors.

For the Democrats Sanders is riding the same anti-establishment wave, and not a left-leaning socialist wave that some assume. There is very little chance for him to displace Hillary Clinton, but she has also misread the mood. She has been moving   to the left to try and steal Sanders’ thunder but traditional “left” and “right” are not drivers. Just moving to the left in policy terms will not serve her and will not remove the stigma of being “establishment” to her bones.

The rejection of “establishment” is showing signs of being a global phenomenon. Anti-establishment views are helping candidates from both the left and the right all across the globe (Greece for the left, Philippines for the right …). It is the perception of offering a “new way” which challenges old, “politically correct” platitudes, which is, I think, the dominating driver.

2016 could be the Year of the Mavericks.

 

Tags:, ,
Posted in Behaviour, Politics, US | 1 Comment »

European Parliament was a CIA brainchild

May 7, 2016

The European Parliament is the most useless organisation in the world – by a very long way. It provides a gravy train for failed or second rate politicians. Those who fail to make it in their own countries, but are in the good books of their parties, are the ones who get sent to the European Parliament. An undemocratic, wasteful, ineffective organisation and without any useful purpose  – to be kind.

But I didn’t know that a single EU Parliament was all a CIA inspired idea from the 1950s. The basic thinking behind the CIA idea was that it would be easier for Washington to control one government, the EU, than to control many separate European governments.

Hardly surprising why Obama and Washington were against Grexit and are now against Brexit.

The Unz Review:

On September 19, 2000, going on 16 years ago, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard of the London Telegraph reported:

“Declassified American government documents show that the US intelligence community ran a campaign in the Fifties and Sixties to build momentum for a united Europe. It funded and directed the European federalist movement.

“The documents confirm suspicions voiced at the time that America was working aggressively behind the scenes to push Britain into a European state. One memorandum, dated July 26, 1950, gives instructions for a campaign to promote a fully fledged European parliament. It is signed by Gen. William J. Donovan, head of the American wartime Office of Strategic Services, precursor of the CIA.”

The documents show that the European Union was a creature of the CIA.

 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/1356047/Euro-federalists-financed-by-US-spy-chiefs.html

As I have previously written, Washington believes that it is easier to control one government, the EU, than to control many separate European governments. …. That is why President Obama recently went to London to tell his lapdog, the British Prime Minister, that there could be no British exit.

European parliament at work

 

Tags:, ,
Posted in Europe, European Union, US | Comments Off on European Parliament was a CIA brainchild

Why Trump couldn’t win – but did

May 6, 2016

I have made this point before. Attacking Trump head on only fuels his anti-establishment support. It is only by occupying the ground he occupies that some of his support can be captured.

Attacking Trump – from any direction – only seems to strengthen his support. That suggests that his support is coming from those who feel that their fears are completely unrepresented by any of the other candidates. The 2016 election is dominated, I think,  by the avoidance of worst fears and not by the meeting of aspirations.  It could well be that nobody will be able to take away from Trump’s support unless they can articulate the same disdain for establishment politics and political correctness that he does and address the worst fears that exist.

The current headlines in the US media are now about how and why Clinton will trounce Trump. It all sounds exactly like the reasons given over the last year for why Trump couldn’t win the Republican nomination. Some of it – especially in the left leaning media – HuffingtonPost, Slate, Politico and Washington Post – are more like wishful thinking rather than analysis. They have not learned from their past mistakes and still haven’t understood the strength of the anti-establishment wave. Bernie Sanders is the only other candidate from either party who has begun to understand the mood abroad. To take away the “politically incorrect” territory from Donald Trump may be beyond Hillary Clinton.

My prediction for November is that Clinton support is more likely to collapse than that Trump’s campaign will implode. And therefore I will not be at all surprised at a very close run election and even if Trump wins.

I started compiling some of the articles since June 2015 which explained why Trump was not going to win the Republican nomination, but I found this had already been done by Moon of Alabama.

Pundits Knew It Early On – Trump Could Not Win The Nomination

And of course the reality is

Kasich Dropping Out Of Presidential Race; Donald Trump Assured GOP Nomination – NPR, May 4 2016

 

Tags:
Posted in Behaviour, Politics, US | 1 Comment »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »