Radical Avenue

According to reports from devastated Sichuan province, the Chinese government has devoted substantial resources to ongoing earthquake rescue and recovery efforts. China’s emergency response now stands in stark contrast to the corrupt Burmese military’s tepid reaction to their recent catastrophe.

The SARS epidemic of 2004 seems to have lead to something of an epiphany for the Chinese ruling party. No one condemned them for the natural disaster itself. Instead they were blamed for their selfish efforts to downplay the scope of the crisis and for their callous disregard for public safety.

China has now changed its ways. Foreign journalists are allowed to cover natural disasters from inside the country. Chinese citizens have more access to information sharing over the internet. And the government has mobilized its military to lead the recovery efforts. These are all positive developments for the Chinese people.

One Party Rule Better than Dictatorship
Unlike some socialist countries, Chinese leaders do not serve life terms. Under single party rule, there are at least small opportunities for enlightenment as new leaders within the dominant party introduce reforms. Dictatorships have no such dynamic.

Chinese Military Respects Civilian Authority
In Burma, a military junta runs the government. The generals in charge base their decisions on protecting territory. World opinion matters little to them. Civilians are expendable. The civilian leaders of China look positively magnanimous by comparison.

Isolationism Rejected
Modern Chinese leaders have clearly dismissed the isolationism and paranoia of Chairman Mao, although they would probably never admit it. Maybe China will indeed become a full fledged democracy one day soon.

China, earthquake, Sichuan province, Burma

Don’t look now, but the Straight Talk Express has derailed again. Lately, the senior Senator from Arizona has been serving up enough whoppers to make the Burger King proud.

Surely by now someone in the McCain campaign has noticed that 70% of Americans disapprove of President Bush’s leadership on the economy. You’d think McCain would be distancing himself from Bush’s policies. Instead McCain has embraced Bushonomics wholeheartedly.

Economics for Dummies
In 2001 McCain opposed Bush’s economic prescription because he “could not in good conscience support a tax cut in which so many of the benefits go to the most fortunate among us.” McCain has since flip flopped on the matter. He now hopes to make the Bush tax cuts permanent. Extending the Bush legacy will cost an estimated $2 trillion over the next 10 years, according to the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan group.

But wait, McCain also wants to lower corporate tax rates, reduce the estate tax, allow accelerated write off of corporate investments and completely eliminate the Alternative Minimum tax. These proposals will cost America more than $550 billion a year, around $6 trillion over 10 years. Nevertheless McCain says he’ll produce a balanced budget by the end of his first term.

The Numbers Don’t Add Up
McCain says he’ll compensate for his massive reduction in federal revenue by eliminating earmarks and “changing the way Washington does business”. Both of these statements are ludicrous. Earmarks have constituencies. McCain won’t likely veto the many spending bills which benefit American veterans. And you’d have to go all the way back to FDR to find a transcendental president. Roosevelt took office in the midst of the Great Depression. We haven’t fallen to that level of desperation yet in this economy.

For argument’s sake, let’s say that McCain ends all earmarks. That would save the country around $18 billion annually. McCain says he would save another $32 billion annually by closing tax loopholes, program review and through reduced Medicare benefits. The budget would still be well over $500 billion in the red under those circumstances. A third grader could figure it out. The Republican candidate must think Americans don’t do math.

McSame, McCain, economy, taxes

Ghana
The peace loving citizens of Ghana have seen their diamond encrusted West African neighborhood explode in violence over the past two decades. Fortunately, the civil wars in Liberia, Ivory Coast and Sierra Leone are now over and Ghana’s vibrant democracy gives this region hope.

When Ghana gained independence from Great Britain in 1957, it became the first sub-Saharan African nation to break free from colonial rule. Ghana and its tiny neighbor Benin have had several elections followed by peaceful transfers of power since then. With the battle scared countries along the coast now holding free elections, democracy is on the rise in Africa.

Nepal
The untimely demise of King Birendra in 2001 shook Nepal like no earthquake ever will. This Himalayan country situated between India and Tibet doesn’t often make headlines, but the news accounts of multiple assassinations inside the Royal Palace read like a story from medieval times.

Birendra and several members his family were shot to death, apparently by Crown Prince Dipendra, before Dipendra turned a gun on himself. The comatose Dipendra actually became King for several hours before his death.

This episode places the fragile and inherently unstable nature of ruling monarchies on full display. Voters in Nepal have now elected a 601 seat Constituent Assembly, and have tasked them with writing a new Constitution.

Bosnia
Years of sectarian bloodletting in the 1990s make consensus building a monumental task in the Balkan States. But recently Bosnian Serbs, Croats and Muslims all compromised on security reforms as part of Bosnia’s effort to join the European Union. These once warring factions have already proven that they can work together for a common purpose when given the right incentive.

Paraguay
After six decades of single party rule, Paraguay elected an opposition party leader as their new president last week. This peaceful transfer of power is a necessary part of fair elections, and comes as welcome news to those concerned about the status of democracy in South America.

Ghana, Nepal, Bosnia, Paraguay

Good news. One of the pillars of democracy has taken hold around the world. Wherever the Olympic torch travels on its way to Beijing, free speech follows.

The People Have Their Say
In America we love open political discourse so much that we’ve enshrined it in the First Amendment to our Constitution. Even two hundred years ago, the founders realized that government suppression of dissenting opinion is one of the first harbingers of totalitarianism. Conversely, free political speech is vital to a government of the people, by the people and for the people.

The US commitment to free speech is so profound that we allow leaders of antagonistic countries to criticize our government on American soil. So it’s unlikely the Chinese government was unaware of the American tradition of open discourse. The Chinese do however seem taken aback by the supporters of Tibet disrupting the torch run at all of its other stops. Apparently word of Chinese atrocities in Tibet has gotten out.

More Bad Publicity for China
Pardon me for shedding no tears over the public embarrassment of the Chinese government before, during and after the Beijing Olympics. The Chinese wanted to host the Olympics so that they could showcase China as an influential modern nation. It seems that old expression “Be careful what you wish for” applies. The spotlight is about to shine directly on China, and the Chinese government may not like what others will see.

The Olympic Games survived Hitler in the 1930s, racial protests in the 1960s and boycotts in the 1980s. They will survive the Free Tibet demonstrations as well. Let the celebrations begin.

China, Olympics, Tibet, free speech

Shortly before leaving office in 1961, President Dwight Eisenhower warned Americans about the rising influence of the military establishment and its corporate sponsors.

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.

President Bush’s missile defense program serves as a prime example of such unwarranted influence run amok. The president purposely antagonizes Russia on missile defense rather than using good old fashioned diplomacy to reduce the need for ballistic missiles and missile defense programs.

Mr. Bush and Mr. Putin should negotiate mutually beneficial treaties for once, instead of always talking past each other. Diplomacy doesn’t cost American taxpayers a hundred billion dollars.

Too Easy to Defeat
Since we live in a peaceful neighborhood, it would probably take long range missiles to attack the US. Very few countries in the world have Intercontinental Ballistic missiles. Great Britain and France pose no threat. And the chances of Russia and China bombing us from afar have greatly diminished in the past two decades.

Lots of countries have suicide bombers capable of making their way into America. Terrorists can smuggle bombs into the US by boat, plane, train, automobile or motorcycle. While the threat from incoming ICBMs diminishes, the threat from small terrorist cells grows. We should focus more directly on this security risk.

Too Expensive
The US has already spent $120 billion on missile defense since 1985. The Bush administration now wants $12 billion more for 2009. This money is better spent increasing port security, inspecting more cargo containers, supplying our troops with armored Humvees and helping to improve conditions in areas that may become havens for terrorists.

Too Unproven
All of the Defense Department’s tests have involved shooting down American rockets at a known time and place. These tests don’t account for steps the Russians and Chinese have taken to defeat missile shields. Missiles don’t always fly straight. They sometimes wobble, tumble or follow irregular flight patterns. It’s not clear how well a missile defense system would work against such rockets.

It’s essentially impossible to simulate a real world ICBM attack and we wouldn’t want to find out about our defense system the hard way. Our leaders should spend more time negotiating arms control agreements and less time touting questionable defense technology.

Eisenhower, military industrial complex, missile defense, ICBMs

Don’t expect John McCain to do the Democratic presidential candidates any favors between now and November. The game is already on for the big prize and there’s no reason to expect any let up until it’s all decided. So the Democrats would do well to just strap themselves in and get ready for another bumpy ride.

It’s not tiddlywinks. Presidential campaigns are vitriolic, partisan affairs which last for months and leave polite contenders in the dust. Every candidate will get roughed up sooner or later. The Democratic slugfest could help Democrats in the long run.

Who can take a punch?
Some people considered George H.W. Bush’s 1988 Willie Horton advertisement racist and unfair. But there’s no law against nasty political ads. In fact, such ads are protected by the First Amendment. Dukakis didn’t handle the attack well and lost the election.

In 2004 John Kerry failed to adequately respond to the Swift Boat ads questioning his patriotism and service in Viet Nam. Voters expect to see candidates defend themselves, forcefully if necessary.

Who can run a marathon?
This election has been in the news for over a year, and it’s still seven months away. Candidates that don’t wear well have no chance. The successful job applicant must maintain a steady course despite the inevitable hazards on the road to the White House.

Who can play the margins?
It wouldn’t matter much if Obama lost a few thousand Clinton voters in California just as it wouldn’t matter if McCain lost a few thousand Huckabee voters in Texas. Turning out the vote in swing states like Missouri, Ohio and Florida makes the difference in close elections. We’re in for another bruising battle.

Democrats, Obama, Clinton, McCain

During a recent trip to the Middle East, presidential candidate John McCain repeatedly suggested that Iran was training Al Qaeda in Iraq. Senator Joe Lieberman eventually corrected Mr. McCain. Iran, inhabited mostly by Persian Shia, does not support Al Qaeda or its Sunni Arab leader, Osama Bin Laden.

The purposely misleading rhetoric sounds like it could have come from the lips of Vice President Dick Cheney. Cheney still believes that Saddam Hussein aided Al Qaeda, even though the 9-11 Commission found no such collaboration. Men who can not clearly and honestly identify the enemies that we’re fighting overseas are not fit to serve as commander in chief.

Actually improved relations with Iran would benefit the US in many ways.

Enemy of Our Enemy
Iran assisted us in our fight with the Taliban in Afghanistan. More cooperation between the US in Iran would help isolate the Taliban and their allies, Al Qaeda. After all, Iran never attacked the United States. Al Qaeda has declared war on the US and has attacked us repeatedly.

Friend of Our Friend
The new government of Iraq has made a point of developing a friendship with Iran. Iranian President Ahmadinejad was recently welcomed to Baghdad with open arms. If the US hopes to leave Iraq more secure than when we invaded, a positive relationship between Iraq and Iran is essential.

Potential Peace Partner
Iran has ties to Hezbollah of southern Lebanon. A lasting peace agreement between Israel and its northern neighbor will probably need to include help from Iran.

McCain , Iran

Joseph Lewis must have a lot on his mind today. He lost $1.6 billion in equity when Bear Stearns went belly up over the weekend. Bear Stearns was one of the most respected institutions on Wall Street. Now, with a little help from the Fed, they’ve been sold for less than the value of the skyscraper they own in downtown New York. That got the attention of a few investors. And with Lehman Brothers stock losing 20% of its value on Monday, the bad news just keeps on coming.

Iraq
The latest estimates project the total monetary cost of the War in Iraq at over a trillion dollars. At the same time, political polls have shown that Americans are more concerned about the economy than Iraq right now. But American voters can still put two and two together.

If the federal government spent a trillion dollars on infrastructure improvements, we’d be fixing roads, bridges and public facilities all across the country. It would put ordinary Americans to work and breathe life into the economy. Iraq is like an anchor stuck in quicksand on the ocean floor. Most Americans have already figured out that we’ll need to cut that anchor loose if we ever hope to sail again.

Unhelpful Happy Talk
George W. Bush lives in an air tight bubble which the real world never penetrates. His response to a crisis never changes. He smiles blankly, assures us that everything is wonderful, slaps a few of his buddies on the back and goes back to watching baseball.

Bush was paralyzed by Katrina, clueless about the ongoing violence in Iraq and indifferent to a federal deficit spiraling out of control. There’s no reason to expect any presidential leadership on the economy either. We’ll have to wait until 2009 for that.

Bear Stearns, economy, Iraq, Bush

Blooming in the garden this week we have exploding canary daffodils, curly cue hyacinth and shocking pink geraniums. It feels like spring.

It also feels like our countries’ long political winter is finally coming to an end. Word has it the electorate is so motivated for a fresh start that even teenagers are voting.

In looking toward 2009, Obama supporters can’t help but wonder whether it’s better to be lucky than well seasoned. All of the grim news from today could add up to tremendous good fortune for President Obama next year if he wins the election.

High fuel prices, the mortgage meltdown, stagnant wages and inflation have brought our economy to a standstill. We may have already entered a recession. But the American economy has always recovered from downturns in the past. Some of our past recessions were followed by robust growth. No doubt the next president will take credit when we break out of our current doldrums.

The next president will also need to bring a substantial number of our troops home from Iraq. If the polls are true, Americans would welcome that news as well. After a five year grind, it looks more and more like Iraq will evolve into a loosely aligned, tribal country. The bottom line is Iraq posed no serious threat to the United States when we went in. It likely won’t pose much of a threat after we leave.

After 2-4 years, the next president can allow the Bush tax cuts to expire and use the increase in revenues to reduce the federal deficit. When Republicans crow about raising taxes, the new president will have a simple answer. “You passed the law in 2001. You could have made the tax cuts permanent then and you didn’t.” Our country seems ready to ask for a new beginning in November.

Barack Obama, Better Times, 2009

After George W. Bush selected Dick Cheney as his running mate in 2000, news outlets announced that Cheney would bring much needed gravitas to the Republican presidential ticket. Then, when Bush became president, he assembled a highly experienced national defense team which included Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice. Nine months later this group failed to anticipate or do anything to prevent the 9-11 terrorist attacks. A year and a half later they launched a preemptive attack against a country that posed no immediate threat to us, and ordered our military to police the streets of the most violent neighborhoods in the world. Experience is overrated.

Hillary has touted her experience throughout the presidential campaign. It’s not working. John McCain has signaled that he will follow Clinton’s lead in the general election and present himself as the seasoned warrior in contrast to the untested Barack Obama. But there’s no reason to believe that he will succeed where Clinton has failed.

When a company hires a new CEO, they don’t always choose the most experienced candidate. Sometimes it’s better to hire the person who doesn’t claim to have all the answers. The candidate with the longest resume may not have the flexibility to adapt to a new world order.

Both Clinton and McCain seem to have an air of entitlement about them, as though they’ve earned the right to serve as president and Obama didn’t. But it should be obvious by now that voters aren’t looking to pick the “next in line” candidate this year. No one’s crossing bridges to the past anymore.

Barack Obama, John McCain, Hillary Clinton

A couple of old our acquaintances have fallen on hard times lately. In Cuba, Fidel Castro survived the CIA’s poison cigars and a 50 year US trade embargo. But intestinal failure from a lifetime of spicy foods apparently curled his toes. He finally stepped down as Cuba’s commandante in chief. On the other side of the world, Pervez Musharraf received another postcard from his fellow Pakistanis. His political party got trounced in the recent parliamentary elections. Wish you weren’t here.

Cuba
Castro will go to his grave believing in his revolution. And that’s just the point. It was always Castro’s fight. He never agreed to share power with other political parties and his leadership grew stale. Now all he has left is his brother Raul and a few old cronies parading around in camouflage.

The next generation of Cubans did not march down from the hills to defeat Batista’s Army. They have no emotional ties to the revolution. But they do have access to the internet, so they know all about regular elections, free trade and Miami nightlife.

Pakistan
The Pakistani people mistrust Pervez Musharraf. He has shown no respect for the Pakistani parliament, courts or free press. The late Benazir Bhutto’s party won most of the open parliamentary seats, followed by the party of Musharraf’s bitter rival, Nawaz Sharif. The election has been widely reported as a repudiation of Musharraf’s leadership.

The American political calendar doesn’t favor Musharraf either. The next president will probably take a long hard look at the relationship between the US, Musharraf and the Pakistani people. The clock is ticking on Musharraf’s reign of error. The only question is whether midnight will arrive with a bang or a whisper.

Cuba, Fidel Castro, Pakistan, Pervez Musharraf, poison cigars

Barack Obama kicked it up a notch in February and left Hillary in his wake. As spring approaches, it has become apparent that Senator Clinton and her staff failed to adequately prepare for a marathon campaign. Senator Obama ran off an impressive string of victories over ther last two weeks and now has the lead in elected delegates. As a result Clinton must win convincingly in Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania in order to catch up before the Democratic convention.

Clinton’s deficient campaign planning reflects poorly on her organizational skills and strategic thinking. Would she be caught flat footed by a natural disaster or military setback in Iraq as well? Senator Obama by contrast, had the foresight to develop a strong campaign presence in the primaries and caucuses after Super Tuesday.

Hillary’s attacks sound a little desperate these days. Her “Words are cheap.” line makes no sense. This phrase is used to describe someone who fails to honor their promises. Senator Obama has given no indication that he is such a person or that he will not follow through on his agenda.
(more…)

When George W. Bush chose Dick Cheney as his running mate in 2000, he selected a man with little interest in one day ascending to the presidency. As a result, none of the top presidential candidates in 2008 identify themselves with Bush’s governing strategy. Indeed change has become the most popular theme of this election cycle. We now know that at least as it relates to some issues, our country will be heading in a better direction soon.

Presidential Relations with Congress
John McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are all currently serving in the US Senate, so the appointment of cabinet officers and federal Judges should be less acrimonious. Of course that assumes that after moving into the White House, the next president will continue to respect the opinions of other Senators.

Both McCain and Obama tout their ability to reach across the aisle. And while Hillary Clinton might have to deal with some hard feelings left over from her husband’s administration, it’s reasonable to assume that she could draw on the personal relationships that she has developed as a Senator. In fact all of the remaining candidates know their way around Washington.
(more…)

Of the remaining viable candidates, Senator Barack Obama most deserves to serve as our next President. He showed the right judgment by calling the debacle in Iraq a mistake from the beginning. His willingness to engage in diplomacy would help improve our relations with other countries. He’s open to ideas from the other party, has a viable health care plan and is serious about reducing the federal deficit. But we know about all that already. Here are some other reasons to vote for Senator Obama.

Fewer Soap Operas
Senator Obama adores his family and seems to have stability at home. He’s not the tabloid type. Obama is too young to have served in Vietnam, so we won’t have to fight that conflict all over again this summer. His parents have no grudge with a Middle East dictator.

Style
Has anyone else noticed that Senator Obama never has a hair out of place? He’s more street lights and less bonfire, more extra dry martini and less Old Style beer. No one uses these three words to describe George W. Bush: lanky, urbane, and eloquent.

Oprah’s Friend
Around nine million viewers in 110 different countries watch Oprah Winfrey every day. Maybe President Obama could convince Oprah to make pending legislation required reading for her book club.

Dick Cheney’s Cousin
While Senator Obama says he will talk with the Iranians, Ahmadinejad can get a little feisty sometimes. Isn’t it comforting to know that the commander in chief still has the old good cop bad cop routine available to him? President Obama could just say: “Look, if you don’t want to deal with me, I could always bring in my old friend from Wyoming.” And the circle will be complete.

Barack Obama, President, Dick Cheney

President Bush’s mid-winter travel itinerary has him passing through some dangerous neighborhoods. And when it comes to danger, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia tops the list. Let’s review.

Birthplace of Our Enemies
Osama Bin Laden, who declared war on the United States a decade ago, hails from a wealthy Saudi family. Most of the 9-11 hijackers sent to kill Americans were also Saudis. Actually Saudi Arabia is full of well educated young men who are capable of fitting into western society while still harboring resentment towards America. None of the 9-11 hijackers were from Iraq or in any way affiliated with Saddam Hussein’s government.

Madrassas
It has been widely reported that children learn to hate the United States and all it stands for in Saudi religious schools. The Saudi government has shown no inclination to close the Madrassas or change their curriculum. This suggests that the Saudi royal family has made some sort of bargain with hard line Muslim clerics, which is not in the best interests of America.

Religious Tension
In addition to its large population of conservative Sunni Muslims, Saudi Arabia is also home to many Shiite Muslims. The Shiites see that the government of Iraq is now controlled by members of their religion, and may seek to participate in the Saudi government as well. The ruling House of Saud on the other hand, seems to disinclined to share power with anyone.

Bombs
Now the US has agreed to sell guided missiles to the Saudi military so that they can “defend” themselves against Iran. It looks like our country is encouraging hostilities between Saudi Arabia and Iran. Isn’t this region explosive enough already?

Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Madrassas, 9-11, President Bush