Day: August 22, 2008

Will McCain Kill The UN?

Does John McCain have a “hidden agenda” to “kill the UN”? That’s what the man who devised McCain’s big set-piece foreign policy proposal says – and he’s delighted it is sailing silently through the presidential election campaign towards success.

This story begins with a Republican presidential candidate who, despite the hype, doesn’t seem to know much about foreign affairs. McCain recently talked at length about problems on the “Iraq/Pakistan border” – the countries are a thousand miles apart. Asked how to deal with Darfur, he mused about “bringing pressure on the government of Somalia”. Uh – it’s Sudan, Senator McCain. And he keeps expressing his desire to build up US relations with Czechoslovakia, a country that hasn’t existed for 15 years.

But McCain does know one thing: he doesn’t like the United Nations. He championed George Bush’s appointment of John Bolton as US ambassador to the UN – precisely because Bolton scorns the UN as “irrelevant” and “a twilight zone”. He even announced “there is no such thing as the United Nations”. It was like appointing Marilyn Manson as ambassador to the Vatican. This is part of a long seam of thinking on the American right: they opposed Franklin D Roosevelt’s spearheading of the United Nations as a fetter on American power, and have never been properly reconciled to it. Republican congresses have refused to authorise US dues to the UN – so there is now a backlog of $2.8bn (£1.5bn) outstanding.

So McCain has decided to build up an innocuous-sounding alternative called a “League of Democracies”. It would be an alliance of countries the US labels democratic that can be used to legitimise US military actions. Charles Krauthammer, the conservative journalist who invented the plan, says: “What I like about it is, it’s got a hidden agenda. It looks as if it’s about listening and joining with allies… except the idea here, which McCain can’t say but I can, is to essentially kill the UN. Nobody’s going to walk out of the UN. There’s a lot of emotional attachment to it in the US. How do you kill it? You create a parallel institution.” Gradually – over decades – McCain hopes it would make the UN wither away.

The Issue Du Jour

What is that?  Dunno, but they have it everyday.

Issues come and go this election year, passing like a blur through voters’ psyches. The fleeting nature of their concerns is a vivid reminder of why handicapping a November election in August is a largely futile exercise.

Gas prices, Invasion of Georgia, Housing bubble, yada, yada–the focus changes weekly, if not daily.

The swings in voter chatter are a reminder that, so far, the election isn’t shaping up as a referendum or a mandate on any one item. Many voters, when asked what their most pressing concerns are, note that they’ve had the same worries for some time and mention a variety of subjects.

If there’s an overarching issue, it’s the economy, but even that has several angles that come and go in voters’ minds: housing, prices, energy, credit.

This plays into the hands of the candidates.  This keeps the voter off balance and confused.  That in return, adds up as votes.  The more obscure the “real” issues are, the easier it is to muck up the process with accusations and BS.  In the long run the losers are the people.

About Had Enough Of McCain–Commentary

I have been reading on the stuff that legends are made, one John mcCain. He has been called by some as a “national hero” or a “patriot” and then others have not been so kind. I understand the idea behind the legend thingy—it is to get him elected. But I want to know what makes him a “national hero? Because he was a prisoner of war? Then what about those that were held with him in the Hanoi Hilton? Are they national heroes also? If so, without Google, name two of those who were released at the same time as McCain.

Now let us move on to the “patriot” title. What makes him a “patriot” where others are not? Could it be that he was in the military? If he wore a uniform, then he was a soldier, not necessarily a patriot. Is it because he serves in the Senate? That only makes him a politician, not patriot. With all the drama that has come out of Washington in the past and probably the future, I would say that they, Senators, are self-serving individuals; none I would consider patriots.

The hero thingy! Whenever we start labeling everyone as a hero, then you diminish the “real” heroes, who do heroic things. No one calls a trash man a hero for doing his job. So to label anyone performing a service for what they are paid for is nothing more than a PR campaign. Do not get me wrong, there are many people who do heroic deeds, but few are ever recognized. The soldier that dives onto a grenade to save his fellow soldiers, is definitely a hero. But because a person wears a certain uniform does not make them a hero.

McCain is a politician trying to win an election—nothing more than that. To imply anything else is just a lame attempt to create a cult of personality around him. But unfortunately, many Americans are prone to the worshipping at the alters of false “patriots and heroes”.

This candidate cannot remember how many houses he owns. He thinks that one is wealthy if they have over $5 miilion. Spends way too much time questioning another Americans patriotism. He has chosen negativity over a discussion on “real” issues. Just a short list of the many reasons I will not vote for McCain. For me Bullwinkle Moose is a better choice.

NOTE: Before I get a wealth of hate mail, let me say that I am not belittling McCain; I am however, belittling the use of labels to sell a person to the public. Peace! Out!

Today In Labor History

22 August
International Broom & Whisk Makers Union disbanded – 1963

Joyce Miller, a vice president of the Amalgamated Clothing & Textile Workers, becomes first female member of the AFL-CIO Executive Council – 1980

International Longshore & Warehouse Union granted a charter by the AFL-CIO – 1988

Candidates Tax Plans–Revisited–Obama

Obama’s tax plan skews the other way, aimed at strengthening benefits for lower-rung taxpayers and raising rates at the top. His plan would restore the Clinton-era rates for the two highest tax brackets to 36% and 39.6%

Obama would exempt seniors making less than $50,000 a year from paying any income tax. And he would make the Bush cuts permanent for poor and middle-class Americans, adding tax breaks such as a refundable credit for wage earners and a higher-education credit for students who agree to perform 100 hours of community service.

Under Obama’s plan, the highest corporate tax tier would hold at 35% — a nod to Wall Street but higher than McCain’s slashed rate. Obama would raise the highest rate on dividends and capital gains from 15% to 20%. And he would keep the estate tax in the same form approved by Congress for 2009, with an exemption for the first $3.5 million and a top tax rate of 45%. That would mean a higher tax rate on the wealthy than McCain would allow.

As for the onerous alternative minimum tax, both candidates would allow more than 23 million middle-class taxpayers to avoid it by extending a 2007 “patch” that raises the amount of income triggering the AMT. In 2007, the AMT was triggered at $44,350 for single taxpayers and $66,250 for those filing jointly. McCain would increase that income trigger each year by 5%, starting in 2013; Obama would index it for inflation to maintain the patch.
Conservative economists caution that Obama’s tax hikes on the wealthy and corporations would increase the drag on the sluggish economy. “It would lead to disincentives for savings and productivity,” said Alan D. Viard, a former senior economist at the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas who is now a resident scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. “Over time, it would mean less capital accumulated and would ultimately force wages lower.”

Now the voter has an overview of both candidates tax plans…please use the info to make an informed decision.

Other Olympic News

There has been enough said about thew swimmer dude……the age of gymnasts…..or what the beach volleyball team is wearing.

Police descended on a group of foreign pro-Tibet activists and some disgruntled business owners from Hong Kong on Thursday, taking both groups away minutes after they displayed protest signs in central Beijing.

The abrupt end of the separate protests—and the sentencing of six foreigners to 10 days of detention for “disrupting public order”—underscored China’s determination to prevent any disruption during the Olympics.

The government has said it would allow protests in three areas during the games, but no application to hold a demonstration has been accepted. One of the Hong Kong protesters on Thursday, Wang Pei, told The Associated Press his group also tried to submit an application.

The group went to the Zhongnanhai compound in central Beijing where China’s leaders live and work and waved a green and yellow sign that said “Hong Kong businesses want justice.” After about five minutes they were taken away by police.

Two Associated Press photographers were roughed up by plainclothes security officers, forced into cars and taken to a nearby building where they were questioned before being released. Memory cards from their cameras were confiscated.

Some 77 applications were lodged to hold protests, none went ahead. Rights groups say the zones were just a way for the Chinese government to put on an appearance of complying with international standards. A handful who sought a permit to demonstrate was taken away by security officials, rights groups said.