Can You Help Me, Please?

It's testimony to where the USA has reached that a black man standing in a yellow T-shirt can be regarded by a mass of white people as a fount of wisdom. How so? I stood behind a sign board near an exit at the US Open tennis this evening and almost everyone who needed information came to ask me. I think they did not notice that the sign read 'Exit' and just assumed it was a kiosk front. My yellow shirt was similar to that of some attendants. But I was carrying a purple New York University bag, and I was slouched over the sign, with fatigue.

One can never get into the mind of another person. I was stunned when a lady from the ATP World Tour came and asked me where she could leave tickets to be collected. I was tempted to say "Right here, miss," because I had no ticket for the evening session, and though I was wasted, I could have taken in Sharapova and Roddick into the night.

I should have remembered the court side attendant for the match featuring the Williams sisters this afternoon. There was a burly black man, with some features that were a bit on the thick side, and I can just about see the possible confusion.

But, is it good that in America a black man can be seen as a regular service worker? Moments before, I had a Latino cleaner come to talk to me about how he had to take on night cleaning work at the stadium, after being put on short time at his regular job. I asked him if his colleagues were mainly Latinos and Latinas. He said they were. People like me could go to watch the tennis. In his eyes, the black man, decently dressed was able to spend time lolling around at tennis tournaments while he had to work from 7am till 10pm to make ends meet. Maybe, the impression is that the American black man has moved on a good way. Interesting.

DC Inauguration 2009 Blog

A little change up being thrown in.

Some friends and I are headed to Washington DC for THE EVENT. Just for fun, I have created another blog, called DC Inauguration 2009 (see link http://dcinauguration2009.wordpress.com/). It's meant to be very spontaneous and has as its only theme things related to the Inauguration and the visit of a band of Caribbeans to DC. I'm hoping that some of the other travellers will offer some words, if not, I guess I can fill in for them all. As we get closer to the date, I hope that the intensity of feelings will rise and will try to capture some of that on that blog. I wont forget about the riveting things going on in Barbados, fear not.

Sophistication.

People who regard themselves as sophisticated should know the origin of the word. They are supposedly, after all, worldly wise. To sophisticate means to make things make less natural or innocent, which usually means by a process of refinement, like education, or to make something more complex such as through mechanisation. Having become sophisticated, of course, it's probably impossible to remember when things were simple and innocent and unrefined. The word also means to alter and make impure, as with the intention to deceive. In fact, sophistry is using specious arguments (sophism) to deceive someone.

Sophisticates know a lot but have also forgotten or never known a lot. You can easily imagine that they know what a cork screw is used for, but probably have no idea how to milk a cow, raise crops, or descale fish. With sophistication comes more division of labour. They know how to push buttons and pull levers on machines, but do not know or prefer not to know how they work and how to fix them when they do not work. Simplest solution is to replace them. There's no need to know how to do the other things: once the wine is being opened, someone else can occupy themselves with milking, farming, and fishing chores. I remember when I first went back to Jamaica in the late 1970s and saw lots of old cars on the streets, still running like new, but clearly having been patched up many times. In England, such vehicles had been consigned to scrap heaps and been replaced by newer models. As cars become more sophisticated, the average owner knows less and less what to do with it except take it to a garage to be repaired. Increasingly, the person who could try to fix a problem him- or herself is being put out to pasture. Sophistication and modernity often find themselves as willing bedfellows.

I'm generally put on my guard when someone says that so and so is not sophisticated. That means that they have not achieved a certain level of learning--this is a form of snobbery at work now--and are therefore near the bottom of the heap of acceptable people. They would thus be greeted by remarks such as "You have not read...[include any piece of literature that has been thought to be influential]? Really!" or "You must read...[include any piece of literature that has been thought to be influential]. It will change your...[life, outlook, etc]".

Sophisticates are usually bigoted, in differing degrees, remembering that a bigot is a person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles, or identities differing from his or her own.

Many lessons are going to be drawn from this week's momentous and historical US presidential election results. It's an interesting exercise to try to figure out if Senator Obama's victory was in fact a demonstration of sophistication or not, or a victory for a sophisticated approach. He went back to doing many simple political things: he organized an enormous grass roots/community support structure, which enabled his campaign to track and trace almost every possible voter. He understood that from acorns do mighty oaks grow (no intentional allusion to ACORN): so small financial contributions from many people can turn into an enormous total of contributions. He, of course, would be grabbed by sophisticates as one of them, not least because of his immense learning and apparent grasp of intellectual issues. But is he also a sophist? I have no reason to doubt his sincerity, but then again I do not know him personally. His policies will be interesting to follow to see if indeed he can be all that he seemed to be on the campaign trail. What I have learned is that he is no naive politician; no innocent; a man groomed in the rough and tough arena of Chicago's political affairs, and who rose through it. I will watch with interest to see what kind of sophistication President Obama will bring to his administration.

History Has Been Made. A Victory For The People.

Last night's victory of Barack Obama in the US presidential elections was truly memorable. A black candidate has won this race for the first time ever. He did it by an enormous margin (see New York Times report), and carried with him a large victory for Democrat Senators and Congressmen. He beat John McCain in the key states that the candidates had spent months battling over, including Ohio, Florida, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, which voted for a Democrat for the first time since 1964. Put simply, he pulled America behind him. He was not yoked to a mule but did this with his free will and his undimmed spirit. He quickly reached out to those who did not back him and showed that his presidency will be a truly national affair. I know that most black people feel pride so enormous that they will probably take years to really absorb all that has happened so fast and so considerably. But, to me, it's important to start to see America and its politics as a field not of racial division but of racial differences that build national unity. The large crowds that greeted the victory were in keeping with those who turned out at almost every rally for Senator Obama. He is truly popular.

In graciously accepting defeat, John McCain made the kind of moving and sincere statement that could have produced enormous support for him and could have changed the election. We must just wonder why his campaign went to the garbage pail of negative attacks, which backfired so badly they must go down as one of the worst campaign strategies of all time. Admittedly, he was weighed down by the failed presidency of George Bush, who managed to divide his country, set the world against his country, and become one of the most unpopular presidents of all time, with policy blunders piling high.

Senator Obama made a typically moving acceptance speech, playing much on the mantra "Yes we can!" Like the little engine, his train is only just about to leave the station. He has enormous expectations laid on his shoulders. His background in community organizing had helped mobilize millions of voters and supporters who had been lost to and in the system; energized a nation to go out and vote, especially its young people and those who are called minorities. The election scenes yesterday and before were amazing. Was this really America, with people standing in awful weather for hours?

The world has been mobilized in support of Senator Obama, not least in Kenya, the country of his father's birth (where they have declared a national holiday). Celebrations were quickly underway in the US, but also across the globe. Here in Barbados, there was whooping and hollering and clapping, as we ate corn soup and ham cutters and bread pudding and flying fish...and boiled peanuts offered by an American lady, named "Daphne". I know that in Jamaica there was celebration too, with plenty of fish eaten. Japan has a small fishing village named Obama, and they celebrated too for hours. Official endorsements came in fast and furiously.

For me, Obama really represents someone to vote for, with ideas that seem to fit what is needed to make the economic and social landscape of America a place where more people can really say "Yes we can!" That is the message of hope. He reflected this with the story of Ann Nixon Cooper,a black lady now 106 years young and living in Atlanta, Georgia, who had seen it all (see Times report). This victory was for people like her: someone who during her life had been denied a vote because she was a woman and black, who could now put her finger on an electronic screen and cast her vote.

I now have to get on with grooming another possible presidential candidate. Miss Bliss is American and already has been mentioned as a future president. She has about three decades to wait to get her chance. But she will be made to believe that she can do it. God bless America.

Happy Days.

It takes a visit by some tourists to help you discover some of the little Bajan treasures. This morning, I had a breakfast date with "Daphne" and her family (see "The World is Bigger and Smaller Than We Realize" and "You cannot be Serious!"). She had promised to bring me a delicacy from South Carolina, boiled peanuts. Having arrived in Barbados four days ago, she and her family had toured the island several times, and enjoyed the rugged east coast, especially Bathsheba. They had sampled Oistins several times, and also "Jus' Grillin'"; I have to admit that I pointed them to places and things I enjoy. They had discovered for themselves, a lovely little restaurant in St. Lawrence Gap, named "Happy Days".

So, after my weekend away in Trinidad and Tobago, I exchanged messages last night with "Daphne"and we agreed on a 8'o'clock meeting this morning. While I waited, I talked to the lady who seemed to be the owner as I heard a very strong English accent. I explained what had brought me to the cafe, and she burst out laughing. "How strange! We met this family at 'Silver Sands' and had drinks with them, then went to Oistins on Saturday." I had heard of these events through my e-mail exchanges, but now I was blown away. The owner, Euralene Nunwa (see picture), had just taken over the cafe two months ago with her husband, Mick (an English-born lad from Derby, with Indian roots). Euralene was Bajan-born but went to England as a seven year old, now was a recent returnee. We had a good laugh as we discussed places in north London where we had both lived. Then up came "Daphne" and her family. "You stand accused," I said to her, telling her that she somehow looked like the person who had been sending me messages. We quickly ran through the morning's events. Eyes popped again.

All of that over, we had a great breakfast--the "Full Monty" English, for me (bacon, sausages, beans, toast and eggs). Daphne, her husband (an evangelical pastor), her niece and her husband (a retired soldier, who had fought in "Desert Storm", stationed in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait) and I all talked about "Muslim fundamentalism" in Barbados. More seriously, we talked about Muslim countries and cultures--the extremes in places like Saudi Arabia, where people are beheaded or amputated for certain crimes, to the other end where the country has its major industry as beer making (Guinea). We talked about the coming US elections, of course--they had already voted: they remained stunned that so much interest existed here for this event.

We talked about the fear of extremist terrorists. I told them about recent neighbours of mine, who had just come from Zimbabwe, and kept a guard at their house in our bucolic neighbourhood, because they were fearful of crime in the island. You get conditioned. "Daphne" and her family told me about being held up by low-level Bajan terrorists at the weekend, as they were pressed for some "purples" by a group of men on the highway: they were near Earthworks Pottery at the time and the people there said that they would report the incident to the police. Still, they loved Barbados, its friendly people, and its wonderful beaches, and would go back with good stories, wit plans to visit again soon. When they return to the US the results of the election should be known and they can start to think about what the next president will mean for them.

For my part, I will go and enjoy those peanuts, and share them with some Bajan US election watchers tomorrow evening. I'll also make a note of signing up for a regular breakfast at "Happy Days".

Make 'Em Laugh. Make 'Em Cry.

Here I am, languishing in Barbados, pining for one good thing. I need a good belly laugh about what's going on in the local political scene. What I see in the local papers are some feeble attempts at ridiculing politicians. Where are the hard hitting digs at the local "high and mighty"? Without searching very far, I can find so many good digs in other parts of the world. Take a look at a few I found this morning.

Is there a climate of fear
that leaves the local cartoonists too timid to poke fun at these often larger-than-life figures?

Jamaica used to have a great cartoonist, Urban Leandro,who took his swipe at politics but also at many aspects of local life. A wonderful anthology of his works are now available, "The Best of Leandro".

One of the local blogs, Barbados Free Press did a puff for their own political cartoons. (see link). But why should they be alone, even though we know them to be our local "mavericks" when it comes to getting in their licks?

The best "cartoonist" in Barbados is really not a drawer, but a sharp-witted commentator, "Market Vendor", whose wit and irreverence in his oral digs are never matched by any images in a local paper.

I will have to think why the standard fare here is so much about "playing it safe" or "with a straight bat", to borrow a cricket image.

You Cannot Be Serious!

I received an e-mail yesterday from a lady in America, whom I shall call "Daphne". She wrote:

"I just found your site and found it very informative. My family and I are traveling to Barbados, for the first time, during the American presidential elections. I am a little nervous considering the amount of Muslims that appear to be in Barbados that it may not be safe for us at that time (especially if Obama doesn't win the election). [My emphasis.] Do you have any thoughts on that? The trip was already purchased before we realized it was during the election."

I tried to be my diplomatic self in my reply, saying: 

"I'm not sure what country you have in mind to visit, but it does not seem to be Barbados. I'm not sure what your concern is with Muslims, but last time I looked Barbados had somewhere less than 1000, out of a total population of about 290,000--that makes for a NOT-whopping less than half a percent. That compares with nearly 10 million Muslims in the USA (about 3 1/2 percent of total population). Maybe you should look at some figures on Muslim population by country (see http://www.factbook.net/muslim_pop.php). 

I'm also at a loss as to why the Muslim population's presence should be an issue if Obama loses the presidential election."

I have to be frank and say that I found the original message very disturbing. I asked a few friends what they thought. As you know, several of my friends in Bim are fellow Jamaicans, and we have a number of "colourful" ways of expressing displeasure, orally.  One erudite friend thought it was from a comedy skit from "Saturday Night Live" or the "Daily Show". Another female friend, whom I can call a "hooky mom", said that she had "t'ree Jamaican blue lights for her". (You have a lot of latitude on what that can mean, but it's not pretty.)

I have no wish to mock the lady who sent the message, whom I do not know, but several things are disturbing. We often hear comments about Americans' lack of awareness about other countries: the USA has a president who was described by the Washington Post as "certainly not an avid foreign traveller" before he was elected to that office (he had actually made brief trips to a few places in Asia, Europe, African and Latin America). The Republican Party now has a vice presidential candidate who only obtained a passport in 2006 and made her first foreign trip in 2007 (to Kuwait--a Muslim country at that). We also often fail to realise that our little islands, wonderful though we think they are, are imagined to be many other things, but probably never hotbeds of Muslim discontent. The most glaring examples are places like Haiti, know more for its destitute poverty than its elegant history as the first French colony to gain independence. We also know Jamaica, which is known for its ridiculous murder rate as much as for its reggae music. 

The lady mentioned that some of her concerns were raised by what she had read on a blog (unspecified), which included what she perceived as an image of Barbados as a hotbed of Muslim discontent as well as many disparaging remarks about women. I try to keep the content of my blog reasonable and responsible, but there are many which are not so careful, either in their own postings or in the comments that they publish. There's a warning there to take care what you put out on the blogosphere. 

On further probing, she did not seem to have a particular bias for either presidential candidate, to quote her: "There are some things I like about Obama and some that scare me (the same with McCain)."  From what I have heard and read, many American voters may be similarly conflicted.

Many Americans that I have met over the years have a sense that foreigners do not like them or their country, and that fills them with a fear that permeates many of their views about visiting foreign countries. Many non-Americans do not take kindly to the spread of American culture, which they feel swamps their own with lots of aspects that reflect consumerism and greed: the French have been notorious for fighting officially against such aspects. Many countries have never been comfortable with the American presence they know well, in the form of NATO bases. Many in Europe pride themselves on being internationalists, with so many countries sharing borders and speaking different languages; Europeans feel that they are more tolerant of foreigners than they believe Americans to be. But we have plenty of modern evidence to show that Europe has some serious and violent divisions (look at the fighting after the dissolution of the former Yugoslavia; look at the always simmering fight between Belgium's linguistic and cultural "halves"; look at Ireland; look at the parts of the former Soviet Union).

While I glibly urged "Daphne" to do a bit more reading and research before she heads out on her trip, I know that the problem is much deeper than can be corrected by reading.

Images of Black Men.

Black hockey players are rare. I'm sure you've heard the remark "I went to a fighting match and a hockey game broke out" as a backhanded reference to the fact that a lot of fighting goes on once the men don their skates. Canada is hockey, and if Sarah Palin wanted to really get a leg up in politics, she'd expand her foreign policy experience, cross the border from Alaska and become a Canadian citizen. She is a self-proclaimed hockey mom, and Canada is anything but mum about hockey. But, I digress.

I know nothing about hockey other than it's played on ice, is part of the winter Olympics, and is not really a major attraction for black athletes. But there are black ice hockey players. One, infamous, current player is Georges Laraque. A native of Montreal, Georges is an "enforcer" who now plays for the Montreal Canadiens: his skating skills are moderate but he can fight, and was unanimously awarded the 'Best Fighter' by a hockey magazine in 2003.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

General/Secretary Colin Powell made his much anticipated endorsement of Barack Obama this morning, on NBC's "Meet the Press". Powell (an American, though born of Jamaican parents) is a Republican and former Bush-W Secretary of State at the time of the invasion of Iraq. He became the highest-profile Republican to add his support to the Democratic ticket. Important positive reasons for this support were that Obama is "a transformational figure", "a new generation coming onto the world stage"; "reaching out in a more diverse, inclusive way across our society"; has "demonstrated the kind of calm, patient, intellectual, steady approach to problem-solving that I think we need in this country". But Powell also touched on negative reasons: he was "concerned about the negative direction McCain's campaign has taken recently"; that the U.S. has "managed to convey to the world that we are more unilateral than we really are''; that the Republican Party had moved more to the right than he liked; that the McCain campaign was seemingly "narrower and narrower" and "exclusive" (citing the feeble and over-the-top attempts to suggest that Obama is associating with terrorists). He was also concerned about the judgement shown in choosing Governor Sarah Palin as a vice presidential candidate: "I don’t believe she’s ready to be president of the United States, which is the job of the vice president.”

Tom Brokaw showed what is really a problem with America's attitude to race--amazing distrust of black people--by asking that Powell deal with the suggestion that his endorsement was because Obama was black. Powell rebutted by saying that he would have endorsed months ago had that been the case. It's extraordinary to get major political figures crossing party lines. But would anyone have suggested that a major woman politician endorsing Senator Hillary Clinton was because the two of them were women?

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Obama has "mo". More information suggests that the coming election is his to lose. His fund raising remains amazing (another record, US$ 150 million, last month); he pulls amazing crowds--an estimated record 100,000 people in St. Louis yesterday; he got a slew of endorsements from major newspapers over the weekend.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Black political commentators arise. Nothing deep, but I love the interventions of CNN's Roland Martin. He's pro-Obama, and very feisty, very probably supports the senator because he is a black man.

How Will Joe Vote?

The third and last US presidential debate last night was more riveting than the anodyne offering last week. For one thing, this as the last chance to "strut the stuff" in front of a national audience. In that sense, each candidate reverted to his "natural" style. Sen. McCain was the "attacker" and "angry"; in fact, he was so zizzed up at times, with eye brows flipping and smirk widenin, that he reminded me of The Joker in the last Batman movie, minus the lipstick (which was left at home in Wassila?). Sen. Obama, is a professor, and I have to profess that though he looked directly into the camera more convincingly, he seemed as if he was on a lecture tour. I found little to change my view of the candidates. I am bewildered how hard Sen. McCain seems to find public speaking, at least in front of cameras. Sen. Obama, for a nerdy, presidential wannabee, seems to have a better, easier style in front of the cameras.

But the man who stole the show, for good and ill, was Joe. Not Biden. But Joe Wurzelbacher, a plumber", whom Sen. Obama had met last week in Ohio, and tried to explain--at great length--his tax plan to a man who wanted to buy his business (see video).



Sen. McCain tried to talk to Joe all night, using him as the stock figure for Mr. Average America. By my reckoning, Sen. McCain mentioned "Joe" more times (15 times, check the transcript, if you like) than he mentioned "Senator Obama". It appeared from the real time reactions that independent voters did not take to Joe, as the lines dipped at mention of his name and plight. My own take was that this seemed like too much talking to one specific person than addressing the problems facing the whole nation. They say all politics is local, but on national TV it has to be national.

The immediate reaction of the CNN pundits was that Sen. McCain won the first 30 minutes, but then got distracted by questions about negative aspects of the campaign that have been higher over the past two weeks. He seemed so upset about Congressman Lewis' comments, but I wonder why he would expect his opponent to deal with an unprompted comment from another politician. Come on, John, go to the Congressman's office and sort it out with him face-to-face: fight your own fight, soldier. True, Sen. McCain seemed better able to defend economic policies this time around. I loved his line "Yes. Sen. Obama, I am not President Bush. If you wanted to run against President Bush, you should have run four years ago. I'm going to give a new direction to this economy in this country." It was a well-aimed put down, and so far the best effort to put distance with what Sen. Obama calls eight years of failed policies.

After the distraction of negativism, Sen. McCain seemed to have his foot firmly on the pettiness pedal--already there with his concentration on "earmarks" and "pork barrel", which are important in principle but such a small part of the whole picture.

Sen. Obama got going better when he had a chance to counter attack. He seemed to deal will the "issue" of Bill Ayers (former Weatherman, responsible for bomb attacks on some US public buildings), and "palling around with terrorists":

"Mr. Ayers has become the centerpiece of Sen. McCain's campaign over the last two or three weeks. This has been their primary focus. So let's get the record straight. Bill Ayers is a professor of education in Chicago.

Forty years ago, when I was 8 years old, he engaged in despicable acts with a radical domestic group. I have roundly condemned those acts. Ten years ago he served and I served on a school reform board that was funded by one of Ronald Reagan's former ambassadors and close friends, Mr. Annenberg.

Other members on that board were the presidents of the University of Illinois, the president of Northwestern University, who happens to be a Republican, the president of The Chicago Tribune, a Republican- leaning newspaper.

Mr. Ayers is not involved in my campaign. He has never been involved in this campaign. And he will not advise me in the White House. So that's Mr. Ayers."

If anyone was listening, there was enough "mainstreaming" of Ayers to make doubters at least wonder what the fuss was all about.

Sen. Obama came stronger from midway and was certainly better at the finish.

"We need fundamental change in this country, and that's what I'd like to bring.

You know, over the last 20 months, you've invited me into your homes. You've shared your stories with me. And you've confirmed once again the fundamental decency and generosity of the American people.

And that's why I'm sure that our brighter days are still ahead.

But it's not going to be easy. It's not going to be quick. It is going to be requiring all of us -- Democrats, Republicans, independents -- to come together and to renew a spirit of sacrifice and service and responsibility.

I'm absolutely convinced we can do it. I would ask for your vote, and I promise you that if you give me the extraordinary honor of serving as your president, I will work every single day, tirelessly, on your behalf and on the behalf of the future of our children."

Well, American voters seem to have economic issues front and centre in their concerns. There is more real economic gloom waiting out there, not just the lowering of the stock market indices, but in the form of job losses and firm closures. It's interesting to look at the so-called "misery index" (see report and graph), which is the unemployment rate. Over the period since the early 1980s, you see that under President Reagan, the rate rose from 7.5% (January 1981) to a peak of 10.8% (1982) to finish his term at 5.3% (December 1988). President Bush "The First" presided over a rise in the rate to 7.5% (December 1992). Under President Clinton misery was almost eradicated as the rate declined sharply to 3.9% by the end of his second term (December 2000). But, under President Bush "The Second", misery has again found company with the rate rising toward 7.4% (August 2008). So, many Americans going to the polls may feel that they have lived through not just eight years of failed policies but the better part three decades, when Republicans were in the White House.

The talk of the current period being worse than the Great Depression resonates more with people if they feel that work is hard to get, and is made worse if basic elements like housing seem under real threat. Loss of wealth through pensions and investments is an added whammy. So, we will soon see if the belief that Democrats are better at reducing misery will strike the ears of those voters.

Speech Therapy.

Well, I missed last night's second presidential debate for the sake of another "Taste of Barbados" dinner, with friends. Now that I am catching up on the goings on in the USA, thanks to CNN (see video and transcript also), I hear some choice snippets from the candidates as they spoke at Belmont University, Tennessee. Who knows if these remarks will be memorable after the elections are over? So, in anticipating that historians will find a few good things to say in years to come, let me share some of what I enjoyed.

Senator McCain: "Well, you know, nailing down Sen. Obama's various tax proposals is like nailing Jell-O to the wall." [That may go into the same box as calling someone "Teflon man".]

Tom Brokaw: "I'm just the hired help here" [Tom, whose ego has not been deflated for a while, tried to be more than that, interrupting and trying be "nanny".]

Sen. Obama: "Sen. McCain, this is the guy who sang, "Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran," who called for the annihilation of North Korea. That I don't think is an example of 'speaking softly.'" [Killing you softly with his song?]

Sen. Obama: "I don't understand how we ended up invading a country that had nothing to do with 9/11, while Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda are setting up base camps and safe havens to train terrorists to attack us." [There you go again, Obama, harking back to things that people said and did, darnit.]

One very telling exchange, and maybe a hint about a difference between a thinker on an issue and a political strategist:

Brokaw: "This requires only a yes or a no. Ronald Reagan famously said that the Soviet Union was the evil empire. Do you think that Russia under Vladimir Putin is an evil empire?"

Obama: "I think they've engaged in an evil behavior and I think that it is important that we understand they're not the old Soviet Union but they still have nationalist impulses that I think are very dangerous." [Sorry, Barack, that's not one word. You need some lessons from Joe on being succinct.]

Brokaw: "Sen. McCain?"

McCain: "Maybe." [That is one word, but what a reply, and the justification is worth reading.]

Which candidate knows more about the difficulties that lie ahead?

Obama: "But, look, the nature of the challenges that we're going to face are immense and one of the things that we know about the presidency is that it's never the challenges that you expect. It's the challenges that you don't that end up consuming most of your time."

McCain: "I think what I don't know is what all of us don't know, and that's what's going to happen both here at home and abroad...So what I don't know is what the unexpected will be." [Well, there you go, John: you don't know what you don't know.]

++++++++++++++++

While financial markets were melting down further this morning (that "fear index" the VIX was at levels never seen before, yesterday and today, near 58--never having broken 50 before), I heard "Markets are acting as if they are bipolar". I think people are really more than lost for words at the moment, so let's leave the floor to the politicians.

Say it ain't so, Joe. The lady is a fence turtle.

Sarah Palin's name can lead to a lot of word play. One word that sounds the same is "paling", which means the sticks (pales) to make a picket fence. Another meaning is to lose colour and we can go down an obvious racial line that suggests a certain outcome if Governor Palin is opposing Senator Obama. But just hold the picket fence idea for today.

Well, we had another night of debates in the US, this time by the vice presidential candidates, and this time enjoyed too in the company of Thursday limers with Uncle R and Auntie L. A shout out for the sushi, shark and bake, and wine.

I wont pretend that I found much of the debate content really riveting (see transcript); many of my fellow viewers voted with their snores. Yet, it was a fascinating contrast on display. In the past weeks we had been led to believe that Governor Palin was "gaffable"; an almost total "ditz"--not too smart; more than a bit folksy in her spoken manner (saying "Darnit" a lot) ; trying to sound ordinary by talking about "Joe Six Pack", and hockey moms; out of her depth on any of the serious issues that we expect to hear top politicians talk on about. But, she had shown that she could learn a script, though unfortunately could not do more than recite the words ("She's a nauseating puppet", my wife said in her text message from St. Kitts last night), and sometimes not in the right order. What was she saying by the repetition of the "all of the above" approach? Was this something on the brief that she needed to read to find out that there were some substantive arguments to make? Did she under that she asked for widening the constitutional role of the vice president? Maybe her wink at the camera was an ominous warning.

Her opponent, Senator Biden, had a long political reputation (a senator since the age of 30), and was known to be knowledgeable, especially on matters of foreign policy. But, he had a reputation for his "loose lips" and "shoot from the hip" comments. I guess he would call himself a maverick. He had some obvious weak spots such as saying earlier in the campaign that Barack Obama was not ready to be commander in chief. In that, he represented some of the slippery side of Washington's politics.

The low expectations of Gov. Palin that had been cemented in our minds meant that unless she fell over, or uttered utter rubbish, many would think that she did well. She stumbled early: "It is a crisis. It's a toxic mess, really, on Main Street that's affecting Wall Street." Other way round, dear, or maybe a profound insight.

She stuck to her brief, so much so that she often spoke about things that were not asked, or asked herself a question and answered that. The moderator, Gwen Ifill, was possibly a bit off balance after the recent contentions that she could be less than impartial given her pending book about the rise of, and change in, black politicians, including Sen. Obama. Ms. Ifill, rarely followed up or steered Gov. Palin back to the topic, and allowed "Our Sarah" to tell us what an expert she was on energy topics, or talk about tax reform. Sen. Biden tried to leave her alone and focused on the "top of the ticket", Sen. McCain, which he did effectively. He did, however, manage to match Gov. Palin on the folksiness and being one of the ordinary Americans, citing often his "Main Street" roots in the Pennsylvania steel-making belt, around Scranton (his home town), or Wilmington, Delaware (the state he now represents). (It's ironic that Scranton is the county seat of Lackawanna County. "Like, I wanna job"?)

But, no doubt about it: Gov. Palin is different, and she showed it often as she tried to be herself. I can understand that for many American citizens she represents a person with whom they can connect. She loves to seem ordinary, and takes swipes at "those folks in Washington". In her own way, she may remind people of the hero in the film Mr. Deeds Goes to Town: a small town person who comes into fortune, heads to the big city and eventually finds a way to turn his fortune and the system into a means of helping out ordinary farmers, fighting off cynical "experts" along the way. That film was set in the Great Depression, so the parallels may ring loudly as the US is supposedly on the brink of a financial crisis that could rival that period.

But you have to admire the single-mindedness of Gov. Palin. No matter what the question, she turned it back to her answers, and the two pillars of almost all her replies were "energy" and "tax reductions". Ms. Ifill asked about a bankruptcy bill; Gov. Palin gave a cursory reply then came back with "I think that this is important to come back to, with that energy policy plan..." She spoke with energy, on energy issues, on energy plans, on renewable energy, about energy-producing states, about energy independence, and on and on. But there was very little substance to the answers. Sen. Biden, trying not to crush the woman's corns too badly just said at one point "If you don't understand what the cause is, it's virtually impossible to come up with a solution." He tried to give figures, facts, and some arguments that sounded like a policy or a plan.

Gov. Palin taxed our ears with mention of tax cuts and tax reform whenever "energy" did not fit:

IFILL: Governor, please if you want to respond to what he said about Sen. McCain's comments about health care?

PALIN: I would like to respond about the tax increases. We can speak in agreement here that darn right we need tax relief for Americans so that jobs can be created here. Now, Barack Obama and Sen. Biden also voted for the largest tax increases in U.S. history.

I admired Sen. Biden for not blinking doe-like in the same fashion as Katie Couric, but it was a hard thing not to do. Staying with the reported strategy, he did not focus much on Gov. Palin, but on the Bush-McCain nexus, including a nicely aimed kick at Vice President Cheney, whom he said "has been the most dangerous vice president we've had probably in American history". He pointed out that he had not heard anything that sounded like policy or at least different policy from the past eight years of the Bush Administration, a la McCain's use of "you don't understand" jibe: "I haven't heard how his policy is going to be different on Iran than George Bush's. I haven't heard how his policy is going to be different with Israel than George Bush's. I haven't heard how his policy in Afghanistan is going to be different than George Bush's. I haven't heard how his policy in Pakistan is going to be different than George Bush's."

One interesting tactic Sen. Biden adopted was to NOT agree with Gov. Palin when she responded to Ms. Ifill's question "Has this administration's policy been an abject failure?" by saying" "No, I do not believe that it has been....There have been huge blunders in the war. There have been huge blunders throughout this administration, as there are with every administration...He [McCain] knows to learn from the mistakes and blunders we have seen in the war in Iraq, especially." That was dancing a fine line of saying no and yes in the same breath, and I think Sen. Biden said to himself that most people would focus on "blunder" and agree that enough already.

What I saw also were clear attempts to connect to ordinary people. These two candidates are really reluctant heroes in not choosing to run for the highest offices, but were plucked onto the wagon to give each side something that was missing and would hopefully seal enough votes for the presidential candidates. Sen. Palin has her simple family story and told it often. Gov. Biden too has a simple family story, even though he now has a better life than with which he began. He tried to demolish several distinctions in one set of recollections:

"Look, I understand what it's like to be a single parent. When my wife and daughter died and my two sons were gravely injured, I understand what it's like as a parent to wonder what it's like if your kid's going to make it.

I understand what it's like to sit around the kitchen table with a father who says, "I've got to leave, champ, because there's no jobs here. I got to head down to Wilmington. And when we get enough money, honey, we'll bring you down."

I understand what it's like. I'm much better off than almost all Americans now. I get a good salary with the United States Senate. I live in a beautiful house that's my total investment that I have. So I -- I am much better off now.

But the notion that somehow, because I'm a man, I don't know what it's like to raise two kids alone, I don't know what it's like to have a child you're not sure is going to -- is going to make it -- I understand."

That said that he was not really much different from Gov. Palin as far as many Americans should see. When he choked on recalling these difficulties of his own life it was notable that Gov. Palin did not offer a word of common sympathy or acknowledgement but came back with: "People aren't looking for more of the same. They are looking for change. And John McCain has been the consummate maverick in the Senate over all these years." That for me was more telling than the rest of the debate. Gov. Palin had been too coached to respond to anything that was being said to her and her pat answer says volumes about what is really at work.

There's a joke doing the rounds. Gov. Palin has been called a "fence turtle", based on a remark an old rancher made to explain what it means if you see a turtle sitting on a fence post: "You know she didn't get up there by herself, she doesn't belong up there, and she doesn't know what to do while she's up there, and you just wonder what kind of dummy put her up there to begin with."

Micheal Palin was funny on "Monty Python", but what about Sarah Palin?

My female friend said "I hate it that people will cut Sarah Palin slack because she is a woman." So, I will not take off the gloves but I am going to try to say a few blunt things. What I have heard Ms. Palin say in public tells me that she has no idea what she is talking about. Her recent interview with CBS's Katie Couric is being dribbled out on TV, and as it is we hear a woman drivelling, if not dribbling. Asked about whether global warming had anything to do with human activities, Ms. Palin said something along the lines that we cannot blame all of man's activities on global warming.

The interview was already lampooned this weekend on Saturday Night Live, and is shocking people because it did not need to add humourous material, just use what was actually said.



In the actual interview, Ms. Palin sometimes just repeats certain phrases in a random, unconnected fashion. When asked for some specific examples of Senator McCain's push for more financial regulation, she replies to Ms. Couric, seemingly blinking in disbelief at what she had heard so far: "I'll try to find you some and I'll bring 'em to ya."



Her hands often do the talking, and they seem more coherent than she does more of the time. Wolf Blitzer was stunned on CNN's "The Late Edition" last night when he played the two clips side-by-side. Art imitating life or life imitating art? Judge for yourself if you think this reflects a disastrous choice.



The word going around (see Huffington Post) is that the McCain-Palin camp are happy with the prospects because expectations have been set so low that Ms. Palin's stock can only go up--but like the Dow, will it come crashing down again? But it's clear that Ms. Palin's remarks to Katie Couric "revealed her broad lack of knowledge on many of the issues that one needs to know when you're a heartbeat away from the presidency" to quote Huffington.

Key conservative supporters and commentators this past weekend stated clearly that Ms. Palin was a bad choice and should step down from the vice presidential candidacy: National Review columnist Kathleen Parker said Ms. Palin should step down since she's "out of her league."(see report).

While I am looking forward to the vice presidential debate due this Thursday between Senator Biden and Governor Palin, I fear that it could be a really embarrassing event. If I am not wrong it could even be really humiliating for Ms. Palin. It could turn out that a savaging by Senator Biden leads to many sympathy votes for a person downtrodden.

For a presidential candidate who is supposed to pride himself on his ability to make good judgements, Senator McCain's choice of a poorly vetted VP running mate shows little supporting evidence of good judgement. For a man who puts so much importance on the need for experience and understanding, especially as his age (72) suggests that he may not be around all the time to carry things with his own knowledge, Ms. Palin's choice is just gobsmackingly insane. She has no reverence for the age (66) and political longevity of her opponent, Senator Biden, and emphasised how long he had been a Washington insider, saying: “I’ve been hearing about his Senate speeches since I was in, like, second grade.” Hmm. That rings a bell. Dong!

Maybe while Ms. Palin is hunkering down with Republican aides at the Arizona "debate camp" she will see a light or realise that she has more important walruses to catch in Anchorage and just slink away claiming "personal reasons".