Fair Is Fair...

Well, yesterday's debate between Obama and McCain provided one or two surprises. Although neither candidate seemed comfortable with the moderator's attempts to encourage them to speak directly to each other, both carried themselves well and spoke convincingly of their beliefs and policies. McCain did far better than I had expected, in fact I think that he may have slightly outperformed Obama on a number of occasions.

My impression was that this event showed McCain at his best and Obama at not quite his most persuasive and articulate. He will need to up his game if McCain continues to do as well as this.

The big question is how Sarah Palin will fare in the Veep debate. If she reveals herself as the shallow and shrill conservative gun nut that many think her to be, then she could lose the election for them. It will be problematic for McCain if she fails to charm the undecided, and maybe seduce a few Dems. It will be fatal if she fails to impress Republicans. It seems that her approval among even GOP loyalists has been on a downhill slope since she was introduced to the country during convention week.

Thursday night's debate should make for compelling viewing, whatever happens.

Bad Choices and Too Much Make-Up...

As the world money markets have descended into turmoil and politicians of every hue have busied themselves with the task of appearing to be doing something, it has been a period of great calm out here on the briney. Tonight the seas are calm and the wind is balmy and easy on the rigging. The old tug is as close to shore as needs be, just near enough to pick up some of the news channels on me old telly. The wireless usually does me well enough, but tonight is the first of the U.S. Presidential debates -- and it is better to be able to see as well as hear when trying to get a man's measure. Poor old McCain tried to back out of the debate, citing the financial crisis, but now seems to be back in the game. This mis-step is just the latest mistake in a long sequence of errors, methinks. Politicians in America generally don't face much in the way of scrutiny, for the press fear that too aggressive a stance might lose them their access, and the public don't get anywhere near those who presume to lead them. I get a sense that McCain fears the debate as he knows that he will appear slow and inarticulate next to Obama - but even more than this, the GOP know that Sarah Palin is unlikely to stand-up well to a debate with a seasoned campaigner like Joe Biden.

Which brings me to a question that has perplexed me for a number of weeks: What were they thinking when the Republicans selected Sarah Palin as McCain's running-mate? I recall her speech at the recent party conference. She seemed shallow, inexperienced and quite shrill. My guess is that the GOP reckoned that a lot of pro-Hillery Dems would vote for the McCain/Palin ticket as they feel cheated by Obama's victory (all a part of Clinton's campaigm for a McCain Presidency!) and another woman will capture their votes. However, I suspect that she has won over only seasoned Republicans. She is not impressive at the podium, she seems to have a limited grasp of the broader political spectrum, and I doubt if she will attract many Dems.

As I conclude this post the debate is beginning -- so, let's see what's what. And who's what too, perhaps.

U.S.S.A.

After decades of aggression towards the old communist bloc countries and relentless preaching about the joys of the free market, it seems that the Comrades in Washington have turned tail and appropriated the ways of the much maligned centrally-planned economic models they used to poo-poo.

Although pretty much everyone on Earth knew (apart from the highly-paid financial money-managers of course) that the residential property market was going to go into freefall and that a deep recession loomed, the financial institutions failed to take steps to prepare for what was to come.

In a truly free market they would be forced to accept the consequences of their ineptitude. But not to worry - they don't need to face-up to the stresses of the market, as they operate in the USSA (Union of Soviet Socialist America), and the government will intervene and save them.

Power to the people!

One wonders whether they will replace the Stars and Stripes with the old Soviet red flag? But the Hammer and Sickle would not really be an appropriate emblem. Hmm...hey, how about using the Red Flag, but replacing the Hammer and Sickle with the image of a dead Iraqi child? They have tens of thousands to choose from, and it would play very well in the Bible Belt, where Bush is very popular and their Christian principles extend to genocide and racial hatred.

Again, power to the people!

As America slides into a Soviet-style police-state, it is interesting to see the Comrades in Washington taking more and more control of the "free" market and intervening to save some companies. But while they act to place the financial institutions under state control, they are simultaneously attempting to privatise America's armed-forces.

One more time, power to the people!

A thought strikes me. I wonder if the Comrades on Wall Street who are benefiting from state intervention are in any way related to the Comrades who earn millions from private security work for the US military (i.e. mercenaries)? Wouldn't it be a magnificent gesture to the hard-working tax-payer if it turned out that they are all supporters of The Great Brain in the White House? Just think how reassuring that would be to a hard-working family who have lost their home.

On reflection, it seems that America really is appropriating the old Soviet approach: All men are equal. But some are more equal than others!

Last time, Power to the people!