Jane Smiley on McCain

Jane Smiley writes about John McCain as the republican nominee for president. [I think he will become the nominee for republicans.] I've thought that he's the "least" of all the bad republicans running, but Jane Smiley has a good point about McCain's delusions of American grandeur that would just prolong the pain we've endured for so long.
--- T

"Any Republican president would be a disaster, but McCain would be the biggest disaster of all, because, both by who he is and what he professes, he encourages the US, as Reagan did, to engage in sentimental, nostalgic wishful thinking about the effects of American "goodness" and "power". The nation, which is at last waking up to the disasters of the last twenty-eight years--the disasters of the "free market" and "making the world safe for democracy" as a cover for ruthless exploitation of all natural resources no matter where they are and who owns them--would succumb the fantasy again, at least long enough for those disasters to be compounded and rendered absolutely unfixable. McCain is a walking delusion--that we really are brave, that we meant well, that mistakes were made but the policies themselves were sound. McCain reassures us that we weren't so bad after all, when we were. We can't come to terms with why the US is in the pickle it is in without consigning McCain to the dustheap."

Read the whole article here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jane-smiley/the-bogeyman_b_83480.html

Obama's Momentum

Obama won South Carolina convincingly. He won the black vote, but also many white votes and lots of young people. I think Hillary has gotten too much "help" from Bill Clinton and soured people's good mood along the way. It's unfortunate. Bill ought to stay above the fray and remain "presidential"; thus uniting the democrats, not tearing them apart. Ultimately that would help Hillary more.

What bothers me about the primaries so far, is that I sense an undercurrent of misogyny in it. Not from Obama, but from many of the people who write and talk about the race. Hillary continues to be portrayed as somehow evil and her motives are continually questioned. She is too ambitious? What about Obama? Aren't all the candidates very ambitious? But that's expected of... men.
--- T

Uusi 1929?

Kolme ja puoli vuotta sitten valtiotieteen professorini ennusti, etta paraikaa eletaan uutta 20-lukua: rikkaat rikastuvat ja innostuvat ahneuksissaan yltiopaisiin, jopa laittomiin rahankeruutemppuihin. Meno jatkuu niin kauan kunnes tulee uusi, koko maailmaa koskeva lama (alkaen Yhdysvalloista), jonka syovereista sitten ryomitaan pitkaan.

Nyt alkaa nakya jo kaikille tuon yltiopaisyyden seurauksia. Pankit menettavat jattimaisia summia rahaa typerien riskilainojen takia, asuntokaupat tyrehtyvat, tyottomyys uhkaa, osakekurssit romahtavat...

Viela yritetaan pumpata ilmaa Amerikan markkinoille, mutta rakenteet ovat niin vaaristyneet, etta pienet laastarit eivat tehoa pitkan paalle. Yhdysvallat alkaa olla niin velkaantunut, dollarin kurssi niin huono ja ulkomaan kauppa niin alijaamainen, etta pieni ruiske kuluttajien kukkaroon ei paljon hetkauta.
Turvavyot kiinni!
--- T

mlk

"I want to say one other challenge that we face is simply that we must find an alternative to war and bloodshed. Anyone who feels, and there are still a lot of people who feel that way, that war can solve the social problems facing mankind is sleeping through a great revolution. President Kennedy said on one occasion, "Mankind must put an end to war or war will put an end to mankind." The world must hear this. I pray to God that America will hear this before it is too late, because today we’re fighting a war."
--- Martin Luther King

Final Countdown!

I have a countdown clock on my refrigerator door that says "365 days" today. This is the final year of George W. Bush as president of the USA! A collective sigh of relief can be heard around the world...

Hillary in Nevada

Hillary takes Nevada. Do you wonder how? Just look at this picture...

Finland's prime minister in Seattle

Matti Vanhanen, Finnish prime minister, visited Seattle yesterday. He toured Microsoft, Boeing and the University of Washington. Finns seem to be on the cutting edge of technology these days - every time I go back to visit Finland they are onto something new and more advanced!

I think that one reason why it's working so well in Finland is that the people in general trust their government to do the right thing. They are not constantly thinking that the government is trying to screw them over, or that the super-rich are trying to get away with something. Although they do have their disagreements and fights between different interest groups, they all seem to agree that they are in the same boat together.

FYI: Matti Vanhanen went to the same high school as me, and graduated with my older sister!
--- T


Business & Technology | Finland's prime minister touts focus on innovation, during visit | Seattle Times Newspaper

Snowing in Kyoto

(BBC)

GOP policies ruining the economy

Two University of Washington political science professors explain how the Bush administration is ruining the U.S. economy. They have written a book about it. "The Politics of Bad Ideas: The Great Tax Cut Delusion and the Decline of Good Government in America".

uwnews.org | GOP policies ruining the economy, UW political scientists say in new book | University of Washington News and Information

No More Nuance

Below is a partial interview of Harold Bloom. He talks about the Iraq war and the media's current, sorry state of affairs. Mr Bloom is a 77-year old Yale literature professor and cultural critic.

"'Media-ocrity' is what I call it. It is awful what kind of media we have today. Nobody dared to stand up and criticize Bush when he unlawfully went to war on Iraq. It is depressing, and shows what direction this country has taken since he came to power -- a power which did not rightfully belong to him. The media is not playing its role. The Bushites are bullies and for a long time nobody dared criticize them and just swallowed their propaganda and lies. People have become scared. In this kind of climate, nobody is interested in the critical voice. You ask about the role of the intellectual in America today and I have to say: What role? What intellectuals? There is no room for them in the simplified and dumbed down world of today's media. We used to play a role, and there are still a few left, but we are a dying breed. Nobody seems to be interested in nuance anymore."

This is where the real danger lies, he says.

"Democracy, whether in Sweden or the United States, depends on the voter's capacity to think. If you have read the best of what has been thought and said, then your cognition and understanding is on a much higher level than if you have read Harry Potter or Stephen King. So what this decline into half-literature and mediocre media really means is de facto a self-destruction of democracy."

http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/73720/

Erica Jong on U.S. Elections

Erica Jong writes a delicious piece about how stupid the mainstream media have become in their presidential election coverage ("high school popularity contest") and how they've neglected their responsibility as the Fourth Estate. But she also writes about us, the people: if we are so stupid that we accept the media's portrayal of politics as such, then we deserve what we get!
--- T

Erica Jong: We Deserve What We Get - Politics on The Huffington Post

Solidarity

Women did come out and vote for Hillary in New Hampshire. But only, it seems, after they saw her stumble. Why not support women when they are strong and ready to lead? Women need to realize that it's ok to admire and support women with power and ambition, not just those who are down. They're not evil witches just because they're strong and smart.
--- T


"So while we celebrate the fact that women joined together on Tuesday to advance women's leadership in an unprecedented way, I also believe we still have work to do. We need to figure out how we can support a woman when she's up, just as steadfastly as we do when she's down."
-Marie Wilson

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marie-wilson/a-novel-idea-women-helpi_b_80879.html

Sweet Victory for Hillary!

Last night's events in New Hampshire were quite surprising to everyone. What a way to turn things upside down and show the world that Hillary ain't dead yet! Good for her, good for New Hampshire voters! I guess there were a lot of other women out there who felt that the way things were going after Iowa were not quite right...
Below is a good blog by Rachel Sklar.
--- T

Huffington Post | Rachel Sklar | January 8, 2008 11:19 PM

NO WAY. This is a crazy, shocking, hilarious, amazing, game-rocking result. How many people had the Clinton obit written? Well, this guy, for one. This changes everything. This race is on, and something feels like it righted itself, because what was happening with Hillary before felt wrong, for a candidate of her skill and stature, and for someone who really did have so much support, despite the high negatives. It felt wrong, to me, after being on that bus and seeing her speak on Sunday. It also felt wrong vis a vis Obama — not his movement or amazing victory, but some of the negative stuff, like not addressing the booing of Hillary from his supporters on Friday night, or the ungracious "you're likeable enough" after she just said he was very likeable. But generally, it seemed completely off to have John Edwards declaring that this was a two-person race — it seemed wrong and not a reflection of reality. And it didn't seem like the way a leadership race — this leadership race — ought to go.

The quote above is from Brian Williams on MSNBC minutes before they called her as the winner. He noted that this, taken in tandem with Iowa, could be read as a rejection of coronation, for any candidate. Said Rachel Maddow slightly earlier in the evening: "What New Hampshire did was come out and body slam the national establishment press." Said Williams: "Voters have decided, 'this goes on from here.'" That's a good thing — and when it does, everyone in it will be better: The press will be better, because this is twice now they've jumped the gun, and twice that they've been wrong; and both Hillary and Barack will both be better, because they'll be reminded that victory is hard-won, and not assured, and no one's right, and a lil' dose of humility never comes amiss. Every candidate who gets back up after being knocked down is better for it. Democrats are lucky that it worked out this way: Instead of knocking out a great candidate early, they get two candidates in the race who are better for it. Now that's a victory.

Disturbing Criticism

Hillary stays in the eye of the storm regardless of her position in the polls. Now she is criticized for getting "emotional" about the elections as she is losing her front-runner status. Usually she's criticized for not showing any emotion - "she is a woman, isn't she?" When she does show that she has feelings like the rest of us, she gets torn apart by the media. She absolutely cannot win in the minds of some people. Where are all the women? Can they not relate to her difficult position? where is the solidarity?

It is unfortunate that people seem to have such a warped sense of who she is and they cannot seem to trust her. Many years of right-wing attacks have surely done enough damage to her image - just listen to Rush Limbaugh for a few minutes and you get a sense of the mindless attacks. He has turned her into a real witch. But I thought Rush was a clown? Who takes him seriously, anyways?

Barack Obama has been able to ride his white horse relatively critique-free - behind Hillary at first, and now as the front-runner. His mistakes are forgiven, and the media treat him gently. He seems to be a great guy... But goodness sakes, he's no Jesus Christ either!

It's hard to figure this out sometimes. It seems so unpredictable how the candidates are framed in the media. Sometimes I wonder though, how much there still is misogyny out there, even among the so-called liberals...
--- T

Wear Orange on Friday!

ACLU is requesting that people wear orange on Friday to remember Guantanamo Bay. Read below --- T

Dear Friend,

This Friday, you can join thousands of people across the country in marking a sad anniversary with an act of hope.

The first prisoners arrived at the U.S. prison at Guantánamo Bay on January 11, 2002. Guantánamo quickly became an international embarrassment. It has made a mockery of our laws and values for six long years. We won’t allow seven; this is the year we are going to end the national disgrace.

Nationwide, the ACLU has set January 11th as a day of protest, declaring that it’s long past time that we put an end to illegality and close down Guantánamo. The ACLU and organizations across the country are asking people of conscience to wear orange to protest Guantánamo. I hope you will consider standing in solidarity by wearing orange on Friday as well.

Guantánamo has become a stain on our nation’s honor. That is why it is so important you join the hundreds of thousands of Americans who are demanding the closure of the prison at Guantánamo on January 11th.

Thank you for standing with people of conscience to demand the US government close Guantánamo once and for all.

Thank you,

Anthony D. Romero
Executive Director ACLU

P.S. There is so much more we can do to spread the word and encourage others to join in this protest. Check here for more ways to get involved.

Curious George Goes to Middle East

Curious George is going to the Middle East this week to see how his prediction of "democracy is on the march" is progressing. He has worked so hard to make it happen (like watching the TV and talking about it now and then with Condi and others). Now, with just a year left of his presidency, it's time to begin reaping what he's sowed. We're all just holding our collective breath...

'Citing hopeful signs from Lebanon to Afghanistan, President Bush said Tuesday that democracy is beginning to spread across the Middle East and that authoritarian rule is "the last gasp of a discredited past."' (According to CBS News in 3/8/05)

--- T

Congratulations, Mr. Obama!

Barack Obama's clear victory in Iowa last night was quite impressive. Same can be said about Mr. Huckabee. Americans want "new and different", and who can blame them? It has been simply exhausting to watch the Bush administration squander all that was good in this country.

It will take a while to right the course of the ship called America because it's been going in the wrong direction for so long. Last night I saw the movie "Charlie Wilson's War" and it renewed my faith in the America that was and that could be, once again. I know, it's just a movie, but it oozed the "gentler, kinder" America that I want to believe in. A place where politicians are real people with real flaws and real hearts.

I do worry about Mr. Obama getting the nomination and being torn to shreds by the likes of Karl Rove. But perhaps times have really changed and people no longer tolerate hate mongering and smear.

Let's see what happens next week in New Hampshire...
--- T

Ilmasto Lampenee

Hesarin sivuilta loytyi tama artikkeli kirjosieposta. Suomessa on kuulemma musta talvi Lappia lukuunottamatta. Pikkulinnutkin pysyttelevat paikallaan, silla kilpailu on kovaa pesimapaikoista kevaan tullen - ja jos selviat talvesta, olet etunenassa. Muutto on raskasta touhua (tiedan ihan omasta kokemuksesta).
Toivottavasti kirjosieppo jaksaa kevaaseen... T

Helsingin Puistolassa havaittiin tänään kirjosieppo.

Kirjosieppo on maassamme yleinen pesimälintu, mutta sitä ei tiettävästi koskaan ennen ole tavattu Suomessa tammikuussa, kertoo Birdlife Suomi.

Kirjosiepot talvehtivat normaalisti trooppisessa Afrikassa. Pääjoukot lähtevät Suomesta jo elokuussa, viimeisiä lintuja nähdään vielä lokakuussa. Marraskuussa kirjosieppo on jo harvinaisuus. Yksi joulukuinen havainto tunnetaan: Virolahdella havaittiin kirjosieppo 6.12.1982.

Suomessa arvioidaan pesivän 550 000 kirjosieppoparia.

Suomeen on leudon alkutalven vuoksi jäänyt talvehtimaan poikkeuksellisen paljon lintulajeja.

Birdlife Suomen tiedottajan Lauri Hännisen mukaan maasta saattaisi löytyä nyt satakin lintulajia. Tavallisesti Suomen runsaasta noin 240 pesimälajista talveksi tänne jää sinnittelemään vain noin 70 lajia.

Esimerkiksi Espoossa uutenavuotena nähty heinätavi on myöhäisin havainto kautta aikojen.

Telkkiä ja tukkasotkia on rannikolla laskettu muutamia satoja. Laulujoutseniakin on havaittu toista sataa yksilöä eri puolilla maata.

Vesilintujen lisäksi Espoon Suomenojalla ovat talvehtimista yrittämässä tiltaltti, mustaleppälintu, peukaloinen ja niittykirvinen.

Lajit ovat hyönteissyöjiä, eivätkä ne ole kovin karaistuneita, joten selviämismahdollisuudet ovat heikot.

"Ennuste on huono. Ravinnosta se on kiinni, ja ruokinnalla voi auttaa", Birdlifen Hänninen sanoo.

Hän arvelee, että linnut saattavat löytää sulan veden aikaan jotain ravintoa vedestä.

Varsinkin Etelä-Suomessa lintujen talviruokintapaikoilla on ollut lintuharrastajien harmiksi hiljaista. Linnut löytävät sulan maan aikaan ravintoa luonnosta, eivätkä useimmat lajit vielä tarvitse ihmisen apua.

Pakkasjaksot ja lumipyry voivat kuitenkin muuttaa tilanteen nopeasti ja tuoda linnut lintulaudoille. [HS]

The Morning Paper Just Got Better

The Seattle Times is getting better this year: it has a new contract with the New York Times and will get more articles from the NYT on a daily basis. This is good news. I will get to read the likes of Paul Krugman with my morning cup of coffee at the kitchen table! --- T

The great divide is likely to get even greater

By Paul Krugman

On Sunday, The New York Times published a highly informative chart laying out the positions of the presidential candidates on major issues. It was, I'd argue, a useful reality check for those who believe that the next president can somehow usher in a new era of bipartisan cooperation.

For what the chart made clear was the extent to which Democrats and Republicans live in separate moral and intellectual universes.

On one side, the Democrats are promising to get out of Iraq and offering strongly progressive policies on taxes, health care and the environment. That's understandable: the public hates the war, and public opinion seems to be running in a progressive direction.

What seems harder to understand is what's happening on the other side — the degree to which almost all Republicans have chosen to align themselves closely with the unpopular policies of an unpopular president. And I'm not just talking about their enthusiasm for the Iraq war; the GOP candidates are equally supportive of Bush economic policies.

Why would politicians support Bushonomics? After all, the public is very unhappy with the state of the economy, for good reason. The "Bush boom," such as it was, bypassed most Americans — median family income, adjusted for inflation, has stagnated in the Bush years, and so have the real earnings of the typical worker. Meanwhile, insecurity has increased, with a declining fraction of Americans receiving health insurance from their employers.

And things seem likely to get worse as the election approaches. For a few years, the economy was at least creating jobs at a respectable pace — but as the housing slump and associated credit crunch accelerate and spill over, most analysts expect employment to weaken, too.

All in all, it's an economic and political environment in which you'd expect Republican politicians, as a sheer matter of calculation, to look for ways to distance themselves from the current administration's economic policies and record — say, by expressing concern about rising income gaps and the fraying social safety net.

In fact, however, except for Mike Huckabee, the leading Republican contenders have gone out of their way to assure voters that they will not deviate an inch from the Bush path. Why? Because the GOP is still controlled by a conservative movement that does not tolerate deviations from tax-cutting, free-market, greed-is-good orthodoxy.

To see the extent to which Republican politicians still cower before the power of movement conservatism, consider John McCain.

McCain's lingering reputation as a maverick straight talker comes largely from his opposition to the Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003, which he said at the time were too large and too skewed to the rich. Those objections would seem to have even more force now, with America facing the costs of an expensive war — which McCain supports — and with income inequality reaching new heights.

But McCain now says that he supports making the Bush tax cuts permanent. Not only that, but he's become a convert to crude supply-side economics, claiming that cutting taxes actually increases revenues.

Oh, and what about his earlier opposition to tax cuts? McCain now says that he opposed the Bush tax cuts only because they weren't offset by spending cuts.

Aside from the logical problem here — if tax cuts increase revenue, why do they need to be offset? — even a cursory look at what McCain said at the time shows that he's trying to rewrite history: he actually attacked the Bush tax cuts from the left, not the right. But he has clearly decided that it's better to lie about his record than admit that he wasn't always a rock-solid economic conservative.

So what does the conversion of McCain into an avowed believer in voodoo economics — and the comparable conversions of Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani — tell us? That bitter partisanship and political polarization aren't going away anytime soon.

There's a fantasy, widely held inside the Beltway, that men and women from both parties can be brought together to hammer out bipartisan solutions to the nation's problems.

If such a thing were possible, McCain, Romney and Giuliani — a self-proclaimed maverick, the former governor of a liberal state and the former mayor of an equally liberal city — would seem like the kind of men Democrats could deal with. (OK, maybe not Giuliani.) In fact, however, it's not possible, not given the nature of today's Republican Party, which has turned men like McCain and Romney into hard-line ideologues. On economics, and on much else, there is no common ground between the parties.

Paul Krugman is a regular columnist for The New York Times.