Obama Wins!

Pennsylvania!

This is one of the "battleground states" and one that most pundits have been saying from day one that John McCain had to win in order to win the White House!

Mathematically, the contest is far from over and by most accounts McCain is doing better in the early counting than many expected. Dropping Pennsylvania though is a pretty big body blow and one that he and the Republicans are unlikely to recover from unless McCain is able to pull Florida, Ohio, North Carolina, and Virginia.

Maybe an update later in the day.

The photo is of Obama and his wife casting their votes.

The Moment of Truth for a Post-Racial Candidate

Is there such a thing as a "post-racial" candidate (photo)? Well, the moment of truth is upon our US brothers and sisters in this most crucial of elections.

I know some of my readers do not giver the proverbial rat's about what happens and who wins. As a student of politics and law, I am interested. To think that the US might finally elect a black man, an African-American if you prefer, is a momentous step, at least in my mind.

Maybe by this time tomorrow we will know who the next president of the US will be. Then again some polls are reporting a tightening race that seems like it might be heading down to the wire.

I like elections!

Sweet Home Obama

This is news that has made headlines around the world and is likely to continue to do so until the US Presidential election process concludes on 4 November.

Now, if Obama wins, then it is likely to be news for a while yet. And, the question will always be will President Obama visit one of his childhood homes when he makes a visit to Indonesia (photo is of the home).

The story is an interesting one in its entirety however a long story short. Obama spent a couple of his childhood years living in the Menteng area of Central Jakarta.

Now some 35 years later a Dutch businessman with extensive business interests in the bar and cafe scene in Jakarta and Bali has decided that a good cafe might be just the thing to capitalize on Obama mania.

It would be a cafe and not a bar. The products of choice would be a Barack blend of coffee mixing Kenyan and Indonesian beans. The other product would be Dutch inspired stroopwaffles. The place is also likely to become a bit of a museum decked out with Obama memorabilia (some might say a shrine). Yet, in a business sense it really needs Obama to come through and win the election. Simply, a coffee joint for a junior senator from Illinois is probably not going to pay the bills.

It is being reported that Bartele Santema is offering USD 500 a month as rent. This is unlikely to get the deal done with rumors floating around of a solid offer for USD 3 million for the whole property and other rumors suggesting that in the event the world sees a President Obama then the value of the property could be as much as five time the 3 million supposedly already on offer.

There is little doubting in terms of the value of the Obama brand should he become President of the USA and leader of the free world.

Good luck to all involved and may your hopes, dreams, and prayers for financial success be realized this 4 November.

You can find news of this momentous event at Bugil News, The Wall Street Journal, AP, and CNN.

Early November

It seems that there are a lot of things happening in November. The US is about to elect its next president and the murderous trio of Amrozi, Samudra, and Mukhlas are to be executed.

A spokesperson for the Attorney General's Office made the announcement on Friday that a date in early November is the most likely time for the three to be executed.

US Presidential Elections

Are things shaping up for a landslide?

I have been reading some interesting articles today that are suggesting that Obama seems to have been getting it right on a number of things, like Afghanistan for example.

My politics are left of centre, liberal, and I am a supporter of the idea of a social democracy.

I am sure that there are many of you out there who are the same and maybe just as many who are not.

I am watching with interest in order to see who assumes the mantle of "leader of the free world".

Nailin' Paylin

This presidential election cycle has provided a few firsts. However, I am guessing the first porn video paying homage to the first Republican Vice Presidential candidate is also a first.

Larry Flynt of Hustler magazine fame has supposedly already shot the movie "Nailin' Paylin" and a release date is imminent. The movie is a hardcore porn spoof of the vice presidential candidate. A porn star by the name of Lisa Ann will be playing the lead.

I wonder if we are going to see a hardcore porn spoof of Joe Biden? Perhaps it could be titled, "Bonking Biden" or the "The Joe Biden Story: Blow by Blow".

Maybe the best part about this skin flick is that there is a script. My understanding is that skin flicks are not usually dialogue driven pieces of art. The script is available here.

If you are interested in seeing all of the promo shots for this film then you can find them here.

Barack Osama

No, this is not a typo but rather how Barack Obama's name appears on absentee ballots being sent to voters in Rensselaer County in upstate New York. In that funny in a perverse kind of a way, the Osama that most people would know would be one Osama bin Laden.

It seems that this is just that, a typo. It does not appear that this was someone's idea of a practical joke.

According to the people who should know about these things, the elections office commissioners, Edward McDonagh and Larry Bugbee, a Democrat and a Republican, respectively, had the following to say:

"It's human error, it's very unfortunate, it's an embarrassment to our office, obviously," McDonough said in a later phone interview. "We wish we could turn back the clock, but we can't."

The remaining ballots have been shredded. However, those that have already filled in the ballots will have them counted even though there is no Barack Osama running for President. I guess this means that everyone has agreed that Barack Osama is in fact Barack Obama.

It is indeed an interesting presidential election in the good ol' US of A.

Obama -- The Race Question

Although many are saying that this Presidential contest is not about race, I still wonder whether race is a simmering issue under the surface that may in fact decide this election. The question may ultimately be, will other factors like the economy trump race as an issue?

Most people when asked a question about race would answer that they are not racist or that race is not an issue. However, when push comes to shove in the ballot box and where no one is watching, will voters vote based on race?

Obama might be leading in most polls at the moment and he is leading comfortably in some. Nevertheless, there is precedent here for a black (African-American for the more politically correct) candidate to be leading a race only to be done over in the ballot box. When Los Angeles Mayor, Tom Bradley, ran for the Governorship of California he was leading comfortably in the polls in the lead-up to the election. Yet, he still lost the election once the counting was complete.

This was 1982, perhaps it is different now. What most pundits believe is that white voters when polled were not acknowledging the fact that they would not vote for a black man. Are things different now?

Palin, A Stripped Moose, African-Americans, and Jews

If you fail to see the connection then you should feel comfortable with the fact that you are probably not the only one.

But here it is and straight from the mouth of Rep. Alcee Hastings (the Rep. standing for Representative and meaning he is a Congressman in the US) who is a Democrat and former Hillary Clinton supporter and now vocal Barack Obama supporter.

This is what was said:

“anybody toting guns and stripping moose don’t care too much about what they do with Jews and blacks.”

This was a comment made to a group of African-American and Jewish Democrats and by all reports brought hoots of laughter and applause from all in attendance.

The idea that being able to shoot and strip a moose in any way reflects how one views race and religion relationships is about the same as Republicans claiming that Barack Obama's middle name says something about how he will deal with Muslims and Non-Muslims. Or that Obama's middle name in some way brings into question his Christian beliefs. It is bizarre and it is stupid!

Anyone who thinks that race and religion are not going to be important factors in this US Presidential race need to think again. Even with the US economy on the brink of free-fall into a recession (some might say the abyss of depression), the idea that race and religion keep coming to the fore says something about this historic moment for the US.

I am not an American. But, if I was I think there are more important things at stake in this presidential election other than whether Sarah Palin can strip a moose or the fact that Obama's middle name is Hussain.

Then again that's just me!

This Day in Legal History

On 6 August 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the Voting Rights Act into law, guaranteeing voting rights for black citizens.

A point worth considering seeing this election year sees the first black citizen of the United States garnering the nomination of a major political party in the US for President.

The Right to Vote -- "Golput"

There is a lot of talk at the moment in Indonesia in the lead up to the next election of "golput". Golput is the abbreviation of "golongan putih" or the white group. In this context it is a group that will exercise their democratic right not to vote and therefore remain white or unstained by the process.

The idea of not voting, at least for me, undervalues the point of the democratic process. In the Indonesian context it is disrespectful to the many people who fought and died for the right to live free in a functioning democracy. Even if you vote and the people you vote for do not win, at least you have stood up, you have been counted, and you have expressed your will. Not voting for me ensures that the status quo remains and that the system never changes. I see little honour in being able to sit back and say, "it's not my fault because I did not vote for that person as a matter of fact I did not vote at all!"

With 34 political parties running in the 2009 election (at the present time, this may change -- different post for later) there surely must be one person that you could vote for who is most likely to be your voice in parliament. They might not win but, once again, at least you expressed your principles through your vote.

This piece is not a lecture or sermon to the masses, but rather personal musings on why I vote and the reasons that I see voting to be important. It is also a chance for me to express some exasperation at why people do not vote. It has always amused me that the Gettysburg Address talks about "government of the people, by the people, and for the people" yet Americans en masse tend not to turn out to vote. It is bizarre to me that Presidents can be elected to the most powerful position in the US with the support of less than 50% of those who are of voting age. I guess you get what you vote for or more importantly what you don't vote for.

Hence my basic problem with the idea of golput. If you are not going to engage in the democratic process of elections then why complain when you end up with the status quo. I think that if you want to complain then you need to have taken the time to get to a polling station and express your hopes and desires for the future of your country. Golput strikes me as a back seat driver without a license telling the driver how to drive.

Truth be told this post was just going to be the following quote, but as usual I have gotten carried away in my little moment. Nevertheless, this is something that is worth reflecting on:

"Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost."

-- John Quincy Adams

Obama + Clinton

It seems that I might have called the differences between Obama and Clinton a little more pronounced than they really are! It appears that there are discussions underway regarding how Clinton will end her bid for President, endorse Obama, and then get the Vice Presidential slot on the ticket...

I guess this ends my days as a pundit!

However, I am reading reports that she is not interested and that it is a case of others trying to make sure the "dream ticket" comes to fruition...

We shall see!

Obama and Trinity United Church of Christ

I have made a few posts on US politics and the General / Presidential elections coming to that part of the world in November. I am not a US citizen and as such my interest is as an outsider. I have been there a couple of times and went to school in North Carolina so perhaps my interest in the whole process is also different from that of others. In any event the interest is not the point and who wins is ultimately no more important than that person will have their finger on the little red button that destroys the world.

However, my comments here are about politicians claiming to be a breath of fresh air, something different, a new breed of politician. Barack Obama has built his whole campaign on change but really it has only ever been about getting elected and therefore it has been a campaign of political expediency. The majority of the liberal and left-leaning press have given the fella a free ride to all intents and purposes. This may have been a mistake for Democrats!

Obama is proving to be nothing more than a run of the mill politician who operates in a world of double speak! The failures to answer serious questions about his relationships with certain people and his beliefs, not religious, but how to effect change have been a lesson in political speak; answering a question without ever really answering the question.

This is particularly so with the decision to resign from the Trinity United Church of Christ! This is a fella who has been a parishioner there for a very long time and when the proverbial hits the fan he bails out without really bailing out. This I would suggest is political expediency, a sweeping under the rug of some unpleasantness without ever denouncing the ideas themselves or ones association with those ideas. Obama is hoping that his resignation from his spiritual home of the last 20 years will end the bad publicity. This bad publicity includes matters related not only to the racially charged rhetoric of the ministers that preach there, such as the Reverend Jeremiah Wright (or used to), but also the "Black Value System" that underpins the Trinity Church belief system.

On the contrary, not only should it not end the controversy it should in fact intensify it! The hard questions need to be asked; like Why now? Why after 20 years? Can you honestly say that in those 20 years you never heard rhetoric like this before? If you did then why didn't you resign then? Should he denounce his former Church, I don't know that would make a difference in the long run. To denounce his Church would imply that he had been involved with a Church for almost 20 years that was preaching a message that needs to be denounced. to do so would severely undermine is ability to claim that he was not aware of that message. Yet, it is catch 22 because his failure to denounce the Church implies that I am resigning because this is no longer a tenable situation for me, I do not agree with the comments that have been caught on tape, but ultimately the Church is reflective of who I am although some of the sermons are not! Political double speak!

The reality is that these questions are unlikely to be asked because the desire for change is real and the belief that there is a real chance that an African-American man can be president. Simply, there are opportunities not to be missed. There is absolutely no reason why an African-American man cannot be elected to the presidency as there is no reason a woman cannot be elected to the presidency or for that matter an African-American woman!

I am always a supporter of acting and voting on a person's merits to be elected to the office they seek. As I said I am not a US citizen and cannot vote.

I am not questioning Obama's credentials to be president and I am also not advocating that Hillary Clinton should be nominated in his place. I am rather questioning the idea that Obama is a new breed of politician who says what he means and means what he says. My personal opinion is that he is just another politician who will say anything to get elected.

To be clear my concerns in this post relate to whether Barack Obama is a new breed of politician, a breath of fresh air, that is going to sweep into the halls of power or is he just another politician that has run an excellent campaign.

I make no aspersions to the man's ability to be president. I do question whether he has fully disclosed what he knew and when with regards to the rants of the pastor of his Church and his one time spiritual advisor. In that sense perhaps the period between now and November will be particularly revealing as there is a more intensive vetting of his record and his associations.

Welcome to politics!

Hillary Clinton and RFK...

It seems that the mere mention of a former assassinated presidential contender is news worthy for its offensiveness when it is uttered by Hillary Clinton albeit the people who should most likely be offended by it have gone on the record to say that they are not. Yet, the campaign of the other side looks to try and draw some political advantage from the comment that was clearly not intended to offend.

What is interesting here is the undercurrent that is not being spoken. Perhaps, Barack Obama's camp took umbrage to the remark because Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June 1968 after claiming the California Primary and it seemed perhaps he had turned the corner and was on the way to the nomination himself. Maybe Obama's camp thinks that this comment will bring out all the nut jobs looking to assassinate another presidential contender and this would some how justify Clinton's decision to fight for this thing tooth and nail to the end.

This is bizarre logic and stupid! The context and the intent is clearly not that but any suggestion that it is, is in fact something that is offensive.

Obama, as do Clinton and McCain, has secret service protection. Not that this is a guarantee or anything, but it does make it conceivably much more difficult for those wanting their 15 minutes of fame by trying to assassinate a contender. To be fair Ronald Reagan had secret service protection and that did not stop a near successful attempt on his life while he was President.

But back to the comment and the context. Here is what Clinton said:

"My husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. I don't understand it"

I just do not see how this is offensive and I do not see it to say anything other than; I am still in this race because I think it is important, I still think I can win, and the race is not over.

However, this is what Obama had to say:

"I have learned that when you are campaigning for as many months as Sen. Clinton and I have been campaigning, sometimes you get careless in terms of the statements that you make, and I think that is what happened here. Sen. Clinton says that she did not intend any offense by it, and I will take her at her word on that."

This though is an attempt at political point scoring because it was not such a careless statement but rather an opportunity to twist the context with a view to gaining some kind of political advantage.

The reality here is that people want Clinton to quit sooner rather than later and this is an opportunity to up the ante on that call. Let's face it these remarks have been uttered before in a slightly different form back in March.

The difference between March and now is that it seems like Obama has wrapped this primary election process up. Although there might be a mathematical possibility for Clinton to win with the support of super delegates, no one really considers this to be likely.

However, the family of RFK released a statement via RFK Jr. that went like this:

"I have heard her make this reference before, also citing her husband's 1992 race, both of which were hard-fought through June" and "I understand how highly charged the atmosphere is, but I think it is a mistake for people to take offense."

Surely politicians have more important issues to debate and rake over the coals than this. What about some serious discussion of the issues that define the candidates, their policies,and their respective visions of the future. Now, that would be an issue worthy of some quality press coverage.

Should Clinton be Playing Nice?

What has struck me about the Democratic campaign for the nomination of the party for President is how nice it has been played. The politics have been downright nice. Whatever happened to politics being a game for the brave who were prepared to play dirty?

Obama said this just recently:


"You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton Administration, and the Bush Administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not."


"And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."


He has since tried to explain this away in a number of different ways but never really retracted it! The closest he came was to suggest that he could have said it better...I don't know perhaps he could have said something along the lines of, I am not surprised that these gun-toting, God-loving, racist, isolationists small towners are bitter about their lives! Is Obama an elitist or are we reading too much into this?


I wonder how you spin this one. If Obama has learned anything from Clinton's super large embellishment of her so-called under live fire Bosnia moment is that perhaps it is better to say; Yep, stretched the truth on that one and get back to the business of campaigning. Clinton's mistake was to try and keep making the incident something it clearly wasn't once the video emerged.


People might still be sold on the "change" and the "hope" for new politics in Washington but it really is a hope against hope in the sense that there really needs to be desire for change from those in Washington. The only other way to get this change is to have a majority of new faces committed to being that change.


In any event Obama has been in the Senate long enough now for an evaluation of his record on policy...why is this so difficult to find in the mainstream media. Perhaps the charges laid by the Clinton campaign that Obama has generally had a free ride in the mainstream media is true!


In a general election it looks like it could get ugly, particularly so when the Republicans are likely to be playing for keeps. What looked like a certain Democratic victory is a whole lot less certain now if Obama does fall across the line for the victory. The Obama baggage is only just about to start getting rifled through and the vetting process may prove much more harmful to him than it would to Clinton. I lot of people must be wondering, super delegates included, how much more there is hiding in the Obama closet because the Clinton closet (including that of the former President) has been picked over for a long while like a vulture picking over a carcass.


American politics, always fun to watch!

Why be the President of the Good Ol' US of A

If any of you were wondering why you might want to consider a run for the White House one day or the top political office of your own respective countries one day, then all you need to do is have a look at the Clinton's income tax returns!

Bugger me if William Jefferson Clinton (aka the Peppermint and Cigar President / Monica Lewinsky's Squeeze / Bill / WJB III / 42nd President of the United States of America) did not make USD 51 million in speaking fees! The total tax returns for the former President and HRC (aka Hillary RODHAM Clinton) total some USD 109 million. The Huffington Post has all the figures listed and tabulated for your convenience.

So, what can we learn from this other than in your post-presidential life you can become filthy stinking rich? We have just learned that based on these tax returns that HRC is certainly not wanting to be president because she needs the money! Let's face it the USD 400,000 she would earn as President is small change compared to what is being pulled in at the moment. So, the drive to become president must all be about wanting to believe that you are the most powerful person in the free world (presupposing that there might be some pretty powerful people in the not-so-free world)!

See ya...gotta go and dream up a plan of attack to make me the Prime Minister of Australia so I can get me some of those speaking fees that are getting tossed around on the lecture circuit!

Clinton vs. Obama

Is the race for the Democratic nomination for the White House really that important? Sure, the race will be one of firsts all round; the first African-American, the first Woman, and maybe even the first POW...an interesting race for sure but is it important?

From the perspective and the belief that the President of the United States of America occupies the seat of the most powerful person in the world, then it is a clear cut answer that the race for the White House is important. Nevertheless, the dynamics of world superpowerdom is changing and it might not be so far into the distant future that the US shares its superpower status with others again. Then the hot seat that is the Presidency of the US might not be the most powerful any longer.

Yet, the reality is that it is still a powerful post. So, with Obama in the ascendancy and the Clinton campaign in seeming free-fall, what are we likely to see when we look into that little crystal ball?

There are stark differences and equally stark similarities between the two Democrats. Both talk change and Obama at least in the sense of his rhetoric talks a better fight. But he is green in the sense of being new to national or federal politics as it is in the US and the real question voters must ask themselves is whether they believe he can now walk the talk! Clinton on the other hand is a polarizing figure at the best of times and it is this love hate relationship that is most likely to be her undoing (assuming she gets undone). She is a political insider and as such is likely to be able to effect more immediate and last change if she was committed to doing so. She knows the rules of the game and is the better day one player. Yet, having only been exposed to the Washington establishment for a short time as a Senator, then maybe not knowing these rules are to Obama's advantage.

Obama is being touted as the new Jack Kennedy which is an interesting comparison because Jack Kennedy's success depended not solely on his apparent charisma, charms, and relatively good looks compared to a somewhat dour opponent and obvious political insider. Yet, Kennedy's victory is testament as much to a savvy PR machine and considerable financial resources and some might argue special interests. Jack Kennedy was a realist he left much of the idealism to his brother, RFK. The question on this front is in his assassination shortened tenure as President of the US did he really make the changes that is inauguration speech is so often remembered for highlighting?

Being labeled as the next Jack Kennedy would seem to be a label and burden I would want to do without. Sort of takes away from you being your own man. Sort of like Megawati always failing to live up to the expectations of those who want her to be the political reincarnation of her father, the charismatic, charming, ladies-man that was Indonesia's first President, Soekarno! Now moving to the Indonesian connection.

The Indonesian connection. Obama's mother was married to an Indonesian and Obama spent some of his childhood in the Menteng area of Central Jakarta. But Indonesia should not expect any special favours from Obama if he manages to pull off his quest to become the first African-American President. Indonesia has not come up in any of his stump speeches and only has been referenced in passing in more wide-ranging foreign policy speeches. At best Indonesia should only expect to garner about as much attention as it does now. Sure, the candidates have set out some general foreign policies and what is striking is that even with Obama's obvious connections to Indonesia there does not seem to be any significant importance placed on Indonesia in comparison to what Clinton has said...

Obama might be hailed as an honorary Indonesian and given the keys to the country in honour of being the first African American Step-Son of an Indonesian to become President but this might not be enough to gain Indonesia any special access or favours.

A fascinating race to be sure...Those Indonesian's interested in the outcome I am sure will remain glued to their news sources and following the race closely and for the rest of us, whatever!