In his victory speech Tuesday, Obama warned that Republicans were preparing attacks from the same general election play book that's guided their campaigns for the past several elections. "Yes, we know what’s coming. We’ve seen it already. The same names and labels they always pin on everyone who doesn’t agree with all their ideas."
And he's right. They've already rolled out the "he's the most liberal Senator" meme, which was used against John Kerry and John Edwards in 2004. And they're ramping up another attack that worked against Kerry: Smearing his wife. The right wing noise machine went after Teresa Heinz Kerry aggressively, painting her as elitist, out of touch, "odd" and "self centered."
Now it's Ms. Obama's turn. Michele Malkin recently called her "Obama's bitter half" and claimed she will be his greatest liability during the general election. The National Review called her "America's unhappiest millionaire" and claimed she has a "relentlessly negative vision of American life." Christopher Hitchens implied Michele was responsible for the Jeremiah Wright fiasco but offered no evidence other than a passing mention of her senior thesis at Princeton.
Other "evidence" presented so far has been an equally far stretch. Michelle Malkin and other conservative bloggers have been pointing to Michele Obama's speeches about Barack being an underdog in this campaign as evidence of her negativity and bitterness. Every candidate in the race, including John McCain and Hillary Clinton, has at some point portrayed themselves as the underdog, but when Michele Obama does it, it prompts replies like this from Malkin:
So get over yourself already, haughty spirit. Pride doesn’t photograph well. And bitterness leaves frown lines. Which means Botox bills. Which “struggling folks” like you and your husband simply cannot afford.
After seeing Obama bounce back from similar "distractions" recently, you'd think partisan hacks like Malkin would at least try a different approach. Obama himself has publicly told them how predictable they have become and warned that the same tactics won't have the same success this time around. But instead of getting creative in their mudslinging, the strategy is to yell the same talking points a little louder.
Why? Because partisan Republicans (those truly only interested in keeping the party in power and regurgitating talking points) want to talk about absolutely anything other than actual issues this campaign season. They can't let Obama make the election about the war in Iraq or the stagnant economy or the crumbling healthcare system or global warming. That will just remind voters how the Republican party failed to address those issues during six years of majority rule. And it will make this election about George Bush.
Republicans can't win that way, so they'll do everything in their power to make it about Michele Obama.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari | Permalink
| Comments
(0)
| TrackBack
(0)
|
So this is why Obama has seemed a little distracted on the campaign trail lately: He's been helping negotiate a peace deal in Niger... and it's working. From the AP:
Rebels who have stepped up attacks on Nigeria's oil industry in the last month said on Sunday they were considering a ceasefire appeal by U.S. presidential hopeful Barack Obama."The MEND command is seriously considering a temporary ceasefire appeal by Senator Barack Obama. Obama is someone we respect and hold in high esteem," the militant group said in an e-mailed statement.
MEND did not say when or where Obama, the leading candidate for the Democratic ticket for November's U.S. presidential election, made the appeal. It said it hoped the government would use any ceasefire to improve conditions for its detained leader, Henry Okah.
In January he performed some similar behind-the-scenes brokering in Kenya after contested election results led to instability and riots.
The guy hasn't even won his party's nomination yet and he's more respected around the world than our current president.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari | Permalink
| Comments
(0)
| TrackBack
(0)
|
In Mogadishu, Somalia. From the BBC:
Thousands of people rioted, burning tires and throwing stones after traders refused to accept local notes and demanded US dollars instead.The recent printing of local shilling notes on illegal presses has led to spiralling inflation, reporters say. This and the increasing insecurity have seen food prices double.
The United Nations reports that soaring food prices have already forced more than a third of all Somalis to rely on outside assistance to feed their families.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari | Permalink
| Comments
(0)
| TrackBack
(0)
|
When we checked in last November, John McCain had missed the most votes of all the Democratic and Republican Senators running for President (there were quite a few back then), and Senators Obama and Clinton had missed the fewest.
So where do we stand now? The rankings are the same, and all have obviously increased the percentage of missed votes since then. But McCain has now become the most absent of all Senators, not just those campaigning for president. In fact, he has now missed more votes than Senator Tim Johnson, who suffered a brain hemorrhage in late 2006 and couldn't vote because of his medical condition.
Here's the attendance record (the percentage represents votes missed):
- John McCain: 58.4%
- Barack Obama: 40.2%
- Hillary Clinton: 29.7%
No surprise, the two candidates that have missed the most are also the likely presidential nominees. There are few professions that allow you to completely neglect your current job while you spend two years trying to get a promotion, but politics is apparently one of them. If a candidate really wants to win, he/she is going to have to skip a few votes. Fair enough.
But McCain has had a lock on the nomination for a while now. I can understand Clinton and Obama spending all their time in Pennsylvania or Indiana--to do otherwise would be campaign suicide. But what's McCain's excuse?
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari | Permalink
| Comments
(0)
| TrackBack
(0)
|
The Seattle Post-Intelligencer has a pretty good time line of how the global food crisis has developed:
Sept. 7, 2007: Vietnam, the world's third-biggest rice exporter, restricts rice exports to slow inflation.Dec. 4: Argentina temporarily restricts grain exports.
Jan. 1: China, the world's biggest grain producer, starts to curb overseas sales of wheat, corn and rice by issuing export permits.
Jan. 19: Egypt bans rice exports.
Feb. 8: The American Bakers Association asks the U.S. Department of Agriculture to curb wheat exports.Feb. 27: At least four people are killed during three days of protests over high commodity prices in Cameroon.
March: Philippines authorities begin to crack down on hoarders.
March 17: India halts all exports of non-basmati rice. It also extends an existing export ban on crops such as peas and beans.
March 28: Vietnam extends rice export restrictions.
April 4: Haitians riot over rising food prices. At least three people are killed.
April 6: Egyptians riot over rising food prices.April 9: Corn commodities on the Chicago Board of Trade reach a record $6.16 a bushel.
April 12: Police clash with 10,000 workers in Bangladesh who smashed vehicles and attacked factories, demanding higher wages to pay for food.The Haitian prime minister is forced to step down in an attempt to defuse anger over food prices. A U.N. police officer bringing food to his unit in Port-au-Prince is killed.
April 14: U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon says that a global food crisis has reached "emergency proportions." The World Bank has forecast that 33 nations from Mexico to Yemen may face social unrest.
April 16: Malawi plans to restrict corn exports.
April 17: Kazakhstan, the world's sixth-largest wheat exporter, bans wheat exports between April 27 and Sept.1.
April 18: India permits rice exports to Bhutan.Indonesia, the world's third-largest rice producer, says it will hold back surplus rice.
April 22: Thailand, the world's largest rice exporter, is under pressure to restrict exports. A World Bank official likens any restriction to Saudi Arabia reducing oil exports.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari | Permalink
| Comments
(0)
| TrackBack
(0)
|
The American mainstream media will eventually catch on to the enormity of global food crisis and give the story the coverage it deserves, but it definitely hasn't yet. In the meantime, here's what's going on in the rest of the world:
The Times: Rising food prices have led Gordon Brown to consider rolling back investments in biofuels, which are drawing a lot of criticism for using up valuable farmland as food is becoming scarce.
Deutsche Welle: Top EU leaders, including European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso and Japanese Prime Minister Yasuo Fukuda, voiced their worries about the prices of food, oil and other commodities on Wednesday. Japan, which imports more than half its food, is particularly concerned about spiraling food prices and said it would place the issue on the agenda at the summit of the Group of Eight rich nations, which it will host in July.
AFP: About 400 people demonstrated in eastern Afghanistan against skyrocketing food prices, witnesses said, in the country's first protest at food costs rising worldwide. The costs of wheat flour has reportedly more than doubled over the past year, with the prices of other staples such as oil and sugar also rising.
Reuters UK: Soaring food prices are a "massacre" of the world's poor and are creating a global nutritional crisis, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said on Tuesday, calling it a sign that capitalism is in decline.
Bloomberg: Almost half the population of Pakistan, the world's seventh-most-populous nation, faces difficulty gaining access to affordable food because of the soaring cost of cereals, a World Food Program official said.
BBC: "A silent tsunami which knows no borders sweeping the world". That is how the head of the UN World Food Programme (WFP) summed up the global food shortages.
UPDATE: I stand corrected. Some U.S. papers are picking up on the coverage:
The Washington Times: "Farmers and food executives appealed fruitlessly to federal officials yesterday for regulatory steps to limit speculative buying that is helping to drive food prices higher. Meanwhile, some Americans are stocking up on staples such as rice, flour and oil in anticipation of high prices and shortages spreading from overseas."
NBC11: "The price of rice has increased dramatically in recent weeks due to crop failure overseas and resulting hoarding, NBC11 reported. And at least one Bay Area store is asking customers to hold back on their rice purchases."
Seattle Post Intelligencer: "Media reports are starting to trickle in about grocers limiting some food purchases, while Costco Wholesale Corp. is seeing higher-than-usual demand for staple foods such as rice and flour as consumers appear to be stocking up."
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari | Permalink
| Comments
(6)
| TrackBack
(0)
|
The Economist takes a look at rising food prices around the world:
Famine traditionally means mass starvation. The measures of today's crisis are misery and malnutrition. The middle classes in poor countries are giving up health care and cutting out meat so they can eat three meals a day. The middling poor, those on $2 a day, are pulling children from school and cutting back on vegetables so they can still afford rice. Those on $1 a day are cutting back on meat, vegetables and one or two meals, so they can afford one bowl. The desperate—those on 50 cents a day—face disaster.Roughly a billion people live on $1 a day. If, on a conservative estimate, the cost of their food rises 20% (and in some places, it has risen a lot more), 100m people could be forced back to this level, the common measure of absolute poverty. In some countries, that would undo all the gains in poverty reduction they have made during the past decade of growth. Because food markets are in turmoil, civil strife is growing; and because trade and openness itself could be undermined, the food crisis of 2008 may become a challenge to globalisation.
To distribute merely the same amount of food as last year, the WFP needs an additional $700 million in funding this year. For a little perspective, that is roughly what it costs to fund one day of the war in Iraq.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari | Permalink
| Comments
(0)
| TrackBack
(0)
|
In its annual report on the death penalty, Amnesty International notes that just five nations are responsible for 88% of the known executions in the world. They are, in order:
- China - 470 executed
- Iran - 317 executed
- Saudi Arabia - 143 executed
- Pakistan - 135 executed
- United States - 42 executed
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari | Permalink
| Comments
(0)
| TrackBack
(0)
|
The U.S. is experiencing the worst food inflation in 17 years. Though, for a little perspective, U.S. households still spend a smaller chunk of their expenses for foods than in any other country--about 7.2%.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari | Permalink
| Comments
(0)
| TrackBack
(0)
|
Last week it was the UN expressing concern about the growing global food crisis. This week it's the IMF and World Bank calling for "an integrated response through policy advice and financial support," following the resignation of Haiti's prime minister due to riots over higher prices for staples like rice and beans.
From the WSJ:
On Sunday, the committee that oversees the World Bank noted that "large groups of poor people are severely affected by high food and energy prices across the developing world." The committee echoed the IMF committee's call for "timely policy and financial support to vulnerable countries" and urged rich countries to be more generous in "immediate support for countries most affected by the high food prices."The World Bank plans to nearly double its agricultural lending to Africa next year to $800 million, and is urging members to ramp up relief for hard-pressed nations. The World Bank, IMF and big industrialized nations also are pushing for the completion of the Doha global trade talks, though cutting food subsidies in the U.S. and Europe under a trade deal would boost prices of food for impoverished importing nations.
The U.S. was a prime target at the weekend meeting of finance ministers, with many leaders taking shots at U.S. support for corn-based ethanol and other biofuels. "When millions of people are going hungry, it's a crime against humanity that food should be diverted to biofuels," said India's finance minister, Palaniappan Chidambaram, in an interview. Turkey's finance minister, Mehmet Simsek, said the use of food for biofuels is "appalling."
Ethanol is quickly being recognized as a poor substitute to fossil fuels by everyone except corn farmers in the Midwest and the presidential candidates pandering to them. A study by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development concluded that biofuels "offer a cure [for oil dependence] that is worse than the disease." A National Academy of Sciences study said corn-based ethanol could strain water supplies. The American Lung Association expressed concern about a form of air pollution from burning ethanol in gasoline.
As Obama likes to say about Iraq, we need to be as careful getting out of this environmental (and energy) mess as we were careless getting in, and a heavy reliance on biofuels isn't the answer. Will any of the presidential candidates have the political courage to honestly address this issue going forward? None have so far.
Posted by Elyas Bakhtiari | Permalink
| Comments
(0)
| TrackBack
(0)
|