Buyer's remorse? Maybe later.

Earlier this year when Obama and McCain were ahead in the primaries, I thought that this would be the best choice of presidential candidates that the US had had in well over a decade. Well over. Once the two were officially nominated and the campaign had begun the quality of the debate sank to the usual cesspool level. Obama appeared to come out on top mainly because he played calmer and steadier by mostly keeping his mouth shut. McCain seemed to set out to destroy his own reputation and image by resorting to the petty, irrelevant nonsense that Bush had used in his campaigns. (So did the Obama campaign to some extent, but they were less aggressive about it.)

Washington state finally got around to sending my absentee ballot 2 weeks ago (I hope the effort did not strain anyone there) and I finally was able to vote. I voted for Obama even though I have never voted for a Democrat for president (I take zero responsibility for Boy George as I did not vote for him either. I did not vote for a presidential candidate when the choice was between him and AlGore--good god!---and John Kerry.) There were a lot of reasons to support Obama, many of which require more of a faith that he will do what he vaguely says he will do and a hope and prayer that he is not as left-wing as his record and as some of his colleagues in congress.

I lost any belief that he was much different as a politician than any other when he decided to opt out of accepting federal campaign finance (he broke his word, i.e. he lied) and then gave his sorry excuse for doing so. Still, I have some hope that he may live up to the promise that he showed early in the campaign. Perhaps he will do well if he can avoid the extremes of some in his party.

Obama is not, any more than other politicians, a paragon. He reneged on his promise to use public funds for his general election campaign, driving a stake into the heart of the post-Watergate effort to reform the campaign finance system. He rejected McCain's invitation to hold joint town hall meetings -- opening the door to the kind of tawdry exchange of charges that we have seen. In both instances, he put his personal goals ahead of the public good -- a worrisome precedent.

But he has engendered widespread enthusiasm in a jaded and cynical public, especially among young people. And if he does not disillusion them in the years ahead, that would be a real gift to the nation. David Broder, Washington Post.

We shall see. Let's hope he does not turn out to be another Jimmy Carter, the previous worst president in the history of the universe before Bush. Perhaps he will do well. He could hardly do worse, could he?

Charge now and pay (much) later

if ever. Business Week has opinion on the financial crisis which, like R. Taggart Murphy below, suggests the past (?) idea of the US being able to drive the world economy by borrowing money from other countries to purchase those countries' goods and services may be gone for good:

...there's good reason to believe that the current crisis reflects a growing realization: Long accepted patterns of cross-border technological transfer, foreign trade, and global finance are simply not sustainable...

...This [system] worked as long as everyone believed that American consumers could finance their debt. But here's the problem: At the same time Americans were borrowing, their real wages were falling—and not just for the least educated. By BusinessWeek's calculations, real weekly earnings for college grads without an advanced degree have dropped every year since 2002.

You can't pay back rising debt with falling wages; something had to give....the entire global edifice was built on an impossibility. Full article here.

The house of cards has fallen and people are starting to take notice. What will Japan do if it cannot base its economy on exports to the US (or manufacturing goods exports to China so that they may export to the US) to the same degree that it has been doing for decades? And what will the US do if we have to stop relying on borrowing and have to raise taxes or cut spending (and rely less on individual credit as an income supplement/substitute) to make up some of the difference.

I am not holding my breath waiting for Aso, Obama, or maybe McCain to explain exactly how they plan to deal with this new reality.

Finally, I can type again as my new keyboard arrived (and not without the usual trouble) this evening. As I watch the markets continue to tumble worldwide, I may need it to type out a suicide note. That may be more likely if I listen to the US election coverage and watch John McCain quickly go completely nuts. And if I listen to the LDP in Japan---which on the 7pm NHK news tonight had an old, old, politician (LDP?) talk about how any election should be delayed to keep the Japanese people from worrying about the economy*---I will not even bother with a suicide note.

I am kinda hoping to actually be able to vote though if the state of Washington could be bothered to send my ballot sometime before the end of the decade. Obama has basically won by default. He has pretty much kept his mouth shut as McCain has gone insane and has started running around like a rabid baboon with a hornet up his ass. Reminds me of the last crazy man we had running, Ross Perot.

*I listened to the simultaneous translation broadcast. The statement is the translator's version of what he said.

...If the events of recent days prove anything, it is that we cannot believe a word that John McCain or Barack Obama has said about what he will do as president. It's not that they have lied. Simply put, the underlying premise of everything the candidates have proposed -- that the economy is fundamentally sound -- is no longer operational...Washington Post

So what? When has that ever stopped anyone from promising or asking?

....Voters should insist that McCain and Obama throw out their tax and spending plans and offer something that reflects current economic realities...

Hahahaha. That's hilarious!!!!!

The time for free lunches is past.

BAHAHAHAHA. Too much! Enough already.

Change in the US: Health Care

WASHINGTON -- John McCain's health plan won't lower the ranks of the uninsured. Barack Obama's fails to curb the soaring cost of health care, meaning initial gains in helping more people buy health insurance would eventually be undermined.

That's the assessment of health care economists who critiqued the plans of the two presidential candidates. Washington Post.

Those of us from the US should be careful about making fun of the Abe/Fukuda/Aso crowd.

Hogs with "Change" lipstick

After spending the weekend and early part of this week watching the financial crisis in the US and pretty much ignoring the meaningless comments of both presidential candidates on the problem since it hits home very directly---why can't they just admit that they have no clue of what should be done but are hoping for political gain---I came across this quote by Heritage foundation research fellow John Tkacik this morning in the Japan Times: (This article is nothing more than a list of guesses by people who don't really know what either candidate will do).

"McCain understands the realities of America's dwindling influence in Asia, but I understand he believes that by reinvigorating strong Pacific alliances, America, Japan, (South) Korea and other Asian democracies can balance China," he said.

"Obama will probably follow his aide's advice, which apparently is to work with China in Asia — and essentially to let China do what it will," Tkacik said.

So perhaps we can assume that McCain will continue the militarization of the US/Japan relationship at the expense of every other relationship in the area? China will be our replacement for the Soviet Union threat, and we will continue to encourage Japan to rearm and to hell with what other countries in the region mean think/fear about that. God forbid that we work with China in Asia.

Obama has said nothing that I have seen that suggests he will do anything significantly different---he can't---so the "change" that either candidate claims is mostly wishful thinking.

The article states:

...in April 2007, Obama made a welcoming speech [for ex-PM Abe] in the Senate.

He portrayed the Japan-U.S. alliance as "one of the great successes of the postwar era" and stressed the need for Americans to embrace "a Japan that is a 'normal nation' — one that has its own identity, vision and goals"...

What does that mean? Do Americans who know anything about Japan not already know that? Does it mean that we will take a neutral position on Japan rearming and accept that there may be different goals? Do we embrace Japan as it tries to exclude the US from various economic groups/agreements in the region? Will we recognize the the right in Japan does not hold US/Western values of democracy or human rights, or accept any responsibility for Japan's actions in WW2. Would we stop assuming that the right in Japan is our friend just because they are willing (more than willing)to go along with rebuilding the military and taking a view of China as an enemy? Or does it mean nothing, just part of a welcoming speech.

From his Foreign Affairs article of last year:

...As China rises and Japan and South Korea assert themselves, I will work to forge a more effective framework in Asia that goes beyond bilateral agreements, occasional summits, and ad hoc arrangements, such as the six-party talks on North Korea. We need an inclusive infrastructure with the countries in East Asia that can promote stability and prosperity...

Sounds nice, but does it really mean anything?

And the man who promises change, the man who does not engage in the old ways of thinking wrote:

...A strong military is, more than anything, necessary to sustain peace...

More than ANYTHING! That's how New Zealand has survived.

Six months ago I thought we would have the best candidates for president that we have had in decades. Perhaps we do, but that is not saying very much. Two pigs wearing Change brand lipstick.

Change

....Although both McCain and Obama have offered themselves as clear alternatives to the Bush administration, a number of analysts now believe either candidate could find himself carrying on many of the policy initiatives Bush adopted in his second term....CFR

...On the Middle East, Latin America, and policy toward India and China, the two men largely agree...CFR

For Security. Trust us.

While the Japanese government can go overboard protecting us from terrorists (well, foreign terrorists. Well, foreigners anyway.) it is still far behind Uncle Sam, the beacon of freedom and individual rights throughout the world---thanks to Boy George and also to all of the Republicans and Democrats who bitch and moan then support him anyway. They must know something that we don't and like a free and open gubbermint, they ain't gonna share that info with us in order to protect us.

The Department of Homeland Security may now confiscate your laptop or any other electronic device which is capable of holding information in digital or analog form and do so without any suspicion of wrongdoing. This is necessary to preserve freedom in the freest country on earth. In fact, any move to restrict the ability of government employees to freely do whatever they want would, in the words of the freedom-loving Homeland Security Secretary, "have a dangerous, chilling effect as officers' often split-second assessments are second-guessed."*

I agree. Now if it weren't for that pesky US Bill of Rights, we could just allow unwarranted searches at the whim of any government official anywhere in the USA at anytime. Thank goodness that the Bill of Rights does NOT apply at border entry points to the US.

The USA does not discriminate against non-citizens with this policy. They will treat everyone equally---like common sh*t if they so desire.

Let's see. You get off of your 11 hour overseas flight to the US. You are a bit tired and touchy after being sardined in a tin tube at 40,000 feet eating the delicious airline food. (Do they still serve it, or are we getting 3 peanuts now?)

Your friendly, polite, customs officer comes up to you to ask you questions to determine if a sleazeball like you should be allowed into the US. Your US citizenship means nothing yet. Not a citizen? Look sorta Middle-Eastern? No problem. He or she asks you several idiotic questions scientifically designed to determine if you are a threat to all that is 'merican. "What is it about George W. Bush that makes you want to serve him?" (Joking, Little Bush's "Justice" Department asks that only of potential employees.) You get a bit irritated and give a reply which does not show proper respect for your bureaucrat questioner, "I admire absolute morons who achieve high office and then attempt to dismantle the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights and are successful at doing so with the support of supposed political opposition."

Wrong move. Your friendly Customs Officer cannot do a lot just because you have not worshiped him/her or Georgy properly, but he or she can take that $5000 dSLR camera that you foolishly brought with you and send it off for an unlimited period to be analyzed for terrorist plans, child porn, photos of plants that may be drugs, or grandma in her undies. Don't worry, your cooperation will rid the world of evil.

Of course, that sort of abuse would never happen. Customs officers are professionals. They are specially selected and trained so that they would never let peevish human emotions cloud their fairness and adherence to the law. Except in this case---they are adhering to the law.

Think Obama or McCain will change this policy if it is still in effect after the election? Of course. You can tell by their vigorous and unrelenting protests concerning the excesses of the Boy George "for security" policies.

*What could possibly be "split-second" about deciding whether or not one has a suspicion of wrong-doing?

(Edited again as neither I nor Blogger spellcheck can spell and I always think of something else after posting the first time. I too, hope to achieve higher office.)

Related article at reason.com.

Dumbing down

I won't make any comparisons to what I see in Japan as "dumbing down" might not even be possible with respect to Japanese politics. I don't expect they could go any further down. However, David Broder of the Washington Post has an interesting opinion piece on Dumbing Down the Presidency. This is not an especially new thought, but Broder refers to some research which by Elvin T. Lim of the University of Texas which found:

...rather than seeking to persuade voters by arguing for their policies, presidents increasingly have sought to build trust by identifying themselves with those voters and their "common sense" view of the world. "Whereas all of the presidents through Woodrow Wilson appealed to 'common sense' just 11 times in their recorded papers, presidents since Wilson have done so more than 1,600 times"...

And this election will be no different. I read Tobias Harris of Observing Japan impression of a couple of op-eds, one from the Obama camp and one from the McCain camp about foreign policy towards Japan. (I had read the original op-ed by McCain's advisors and was underwhelmed.)

Despite Mr. Harris' gallant attempt to make sense of next to nothing, I cannot figure out what these guys actually plan---if anything.

Presidential candidates dumbing down to the level of a quick blog entry.