the sawpit

A Global Protection Racket

Notes from Blighty – by Chris Cobb

The bully boys (aka the U.S. State Department) have just left town and while they were here many businesses were told that if they were trading with Cuba, they might want to reconsider. The bully boys didn't visit multinational corporations who all know better, they reached down to the level of the mom and pop stores. Now don't imagine these little people were visited by big guys with sharkskin suits and dark glasses ('Nice little store you got here, Mrs Brown. Shame to see something happen to it,' he said, tipping over a barrel of kippers), it doesn't work that way. They let the banks do the strong-arm stuff. Any British bank with ties to U.S. financial institutions (read all of them) were told if they wanted to keep their cozy relationship they had better lean on their customers who were defying the U.S. trade embargo. So a tobacconist who sold Cuban cigars or a commodities trader who was doing brisk business in organic Cuban sugar was informed by his bank that if he didn't want to see his loan threatened or his currency exchange mechanism turned off, he might want 'to make other arrangements'.

Needless to say, these small businesses, like the rest of the world, are hoping to celebrate an Obama election.

Tempest or Teapot?

Much has been said about the contentious primary battle between Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama over the past few months. I know we are all happy it's now history. As an early Edwards supporter, I was neutral when it came to the other candidates. But I was very disturbed when their supporters started demonizing each other. On the Obama side of the blog community, you had the sort of Clinton bashing you'd expect from dittoheads. And on the Hillary Clinton side, there was the sort of divisive politics Karl Rove has spent his life perfecting. In the end, I believe that Clinton's early support of the Iraq invasion,  and her campaign strategy of praising John McCain's qualifications for the presidency while belittling Obama's, turned many undecided Democrats against her. You see, as much as I don't care for the current GOP mindset of party unity at all cost, sometimes it's just the right thing to do. One's desire and desperation to become the party nominee should never trump the real goal of winning back the White House. And Hillary Clinton would have expected that same restraint from Barack Obama had he been trying to catch up to a Clinton lead.

Now I am not here to scold my fellow Democrats like an angry parent. But I think we can learn from this experience and grow from it. We should be focusing on the policy differences, not identity politics. To bash fellow Democrats during the primary season is self-defeating. The party must come first especially when so much is at stake. For months angry Clinton supporters railed against the "obvious" media bias for Barack Obama. They bristled at the idea that anyone could dislike Hillary Clinton for reasons other than simply being a woman. And, yes many of those sexist attacks were ugly. Blake Fleetwood at Huffington Post had no trouble convincing me that "sexism is alive and well in America." In fact, I've been bugged by it for years. And his May 18th post was rather evenhanded:

To be sure there have been many racist incidents in this heated campaign as seen by Kevin Merida article in the Washington Post earlier this week which drew 2100 comments and much media attention.

However, the embedded eight minute video not only show cases vulgar and tasteless invective aimed at  Hillary Clinton, it also condemns Barack Obama for not speaking out against the attacks. At the start of the video, a quote from veteran journalist Tom Watson is cited:

[U]nless Barack Obama speaks out, his campaign's chilling acceptance of the gender bias stirred by our national media will remind many of Ronald Reagan's race-baiting southern strategy--because if Obama accepts the presidency, at least in part, because of abject sexism, a brutal gender attack on a female rival -- the most famous female Democrat in history--he will set feminism in our country back a generation.

The assumption that Obama is obligated to attack every talking head, columnist and blogger who happens to stir sexism into their arguments seems a bit of a stretch. In fact, the vast majority of commentators did not resort to such cynical and backward attacks. Most Democrats are liberal, open-minded, and certainly not sexist. (I would love to see a list of sources for the worst offenders showcased on this documentary. My guess is that most represent the dregs of the right-wing Neanderthal movement.) And the very idea of his non-action setting feminism back a generation is laughable. Because if we really want to end the acceptance of sexism in the media, we must start a letter writing campaign against the offending pundits, authors and their publishers. We must all fight back together and demand a change in attitude.

Claiming that somehow Obama would owe his win to the sexist invective of small minded people like is mind-boggling. It just smacks of political desperation--especially when you consider that Clinton took full advantage of the conservative white males who would not vote for Obama because he's an African American. And as far as "The most famous female Democrat in history" is concerned, it's hard to call. So what is the current status of Eleanor Roosevelt as an inspiration for women in America? I will assume he meant the most famous elected female Democrat in history, because that is certainly true.

I know Tom Watson is a loyal Democrat and has called on his readers to support Barack Obama for president. But I just want to make sure we never go down this destructive road again. We can support our candidate and still keep our eyes on the prize at the same time. The consequences of failure are far too great--especially if you care about advancing women's rights.

Agatha Christie TV

Notes from Blighty – by Chris Cobb

Exploring television in Britain you find you are never far from a gardening show or a cookery show.

Or Agatha Christie. In a country that loves a good mystery and possesses many a good murder-monger, she reigns over the airwaves like a prevailing wind. There are evenings when a loyal fan might have to choose between reruns of Joan Hickson's Miss Marple and David Suchet's Poirot.

Take this past Saturday for example. There was a oft-repeated Poirot on ITV, an old Tommy and Tuppence on ITV 3, and BBC 4 had 'Agatha Christie: A Life in Pictures'.

And even BBC 1's Doctor Who, according to the Daily Mail's TV page, has become interested in '. . . the disappearance of Agatha Christie . . . Was it a nervous breakdown, as she claimed, or a publicity stunt? Or perhaps she was abducted by a giant alien wasp?'

This was all on one night. I swear.

Comedy Imitates Life

Last week on the season finale of Saturday Night Live, Senator John McCain appeared on the Weekend Update news segment encouraging Democrats to let the nomination process drag on as long as possible -- even past the Convention in August. Why not keep the party going until you have no choice but to pick them both? Of course this was supposed to be a parody of what John McCain really thinks. But I didn't find it funny because, well, it's kinda true. I don't care how you spin it -- dragging this primary out has been bad for the Democrats, and good for Senator McCain.

There is a war going on within the Democratic party. And it's not pretty. Some Democrats are taking this primary contest far too personally. If one peruses the pro-Obama and pro-Clinton blogs, the level of antagonism for the other side can be quite off-putting. These staunch supporters cannot be honestly critical about their own candidate. When the most outrageous comments are made by Obama or Clinton supporters, the other side attributes that attitude to the candidates themselves. 

But here is some common sense from radio host Thom Hartmann. I found this posted on Air America's Web site:

Obama - Ask Hillary First!

The issue at hand for the Democratic Party for winning in ‘08 is not losing to McCain but losing to a divided Democratic party. The first thing Obama should do if nominated is put Hillary on the ticket. Will the Republicans have a field day with her on the ticket? Yes! Is their some bad blood in the water due to some negative campaign strategies on the part of the Clintons? Probably. Can Hillary be a tough fighter able to play tough allowing Obama to stay higher above the fray? Yes!

Howard Dean said a few months ago that the loser will be the most important person in the Democratic presidential run this year. Hillary's legacy in this 08 election could place her as the healer and bring together a united Democratic party. As a winning ticket they also move this country closer to healing the racial and misogynist undertones that still have roots.

Can you picture Denver with Hillary's delegates close to half of all delegates demanding that she be included on the ticket? To some it's a crusade. If Hillary was the one out ahead - by just a little over half - wouldn't Obama supporters want the same?

Obama's offer and Hillary's acceptance of an Obama/Clinton ticket hold the healing and the power to move this country in the direction of the real change in Washington that Obama talks about. First he must bring the Democrats back together again.

Obama - ask Hillary first. And if she should say no, the offer would still have a unifying affect.

--Thom Hartmann

Not sure it's fair to blame Hillary Clinton for all the bad blood. But I don't think she's run the smartest campaign (as recently demonstrated by her mention of Bobby Kennedy's assassination in June, 1968 in order to defend staying in the race). Yes she had to be more aggressive to stay in there. That's just politics. But Clinton cannot deny the reality of where the delegate battle is going. Her position is becoming untenable.

But there is another problem. Many Hillary Clinton supporters feel that the sexist attacks in the media against her have been rampant. Some state they will not vote for Obama because of his silence on this issue. The idea of a unity ticket does not satisfy them. Just like many Obama supporters, having the other candidate on the ticket is unthinkable to them. I find it strange since both are moderate Democrats who don't really differ that much on the important issues. We all support the platform of the Democratic Party, don't we?

It's very simple. Obama and Clinton have both been victims of dirty campaigning from the GOP and by fellow Dems. So the bigger question is, when do we stop self-destructing our party and focus on the most important problems? That's not just rhetoric. This primary has not evolved into the war on sexism and racism 2008. The fight against ignorance and injustice goes on no matter who is President. We can't take our eyes off the prize because we don't like the way our media deals with certain issues. I think the sexism and racism permeating our media is a clever way of creating cynicism. People get so disgusted by the negativity, they end up not voting at all. We shouldn't sit back and let this happen again. So I agree with Hartmann's overall message: a unity ticket if possible. Victory at all costs.

Our New Mayor of London

Notes from Blighty – by Chris Cobb

Londoners have just gone to the polls to unseat their long-time mayor, Ken ('Red Ken') Livingstone, in favor of maverick Tory Boris Johnson. This outcome was considered so unlikely back in the autumn when Boris announced his candidacy that the bookies would give you 16-1 against. Boris, you see, was considered something of a buffoon, if not an outright liability, within the Conservative Party. That he was elected says something about rebellious Londoners who refuse to be dictated to by the pollsters and The Guardian; sort of like high schoolers electing the class clown as student council president in order to stick it to the school authorities.

Following are some of Boris's more infamous pronouncements:

On George W Bush
"The President is a cross-eyed Texan warmonger, unelected, inarticulate, who epitomises the arrogance of American foreign policy."

On using a mobile phone while driving
"I don't believe that is necessarily any more dangerous than the many other risky things that people do with their free hands while driving - nose-picking, reading the paper, studying the A-Z, beating the children, and so on."

On commuting
"I forgot that to rely on a train, in Blair's Britain, is to engage in a crapshoot with the devil."

On Euro-scepticism
"I can hardly condemn UKIP as a bunch of boss-eyed, foam-flecked Euro hysterics, when I have been sometimes not far short of boss-eyed, foam-flecked hysteria myself."

Tony Blair
"It is just flipping unbelievable. He is a mixture of Harry Houdini and a greased piglet. He is barely human in his elusiveness. Nailing Blair is like trying to pin jelly to a wall."

On becoming Prime Minister:
"My chances of being PM are about as good as the chances of finding Elvis on Mars, or my being reincarnated as an olive."

On Channel 5
"I don't see why people are so snooty about Channel 5. It has some respectable documentaries about the Second World War. It also devotes considerable airtime to investigations into lap-dancing, and other related and vital subjects."

On being sacked by Michael Howard
"My friends, as I have discovered myself, there are no disasters, only opportunities. And, indeed, opportunities for fresh disasters."

On how to vote
"Voting Tory will cause your wife to have bigger breasts and increase your chances of owning a BMW M3."

On why he voted for David Cameron as Tory leader
"I'm backing David Cameron's campaign out of pure, cynical self-interest."

On drugs
"I think I was once given cocaine but I sneezed so it didn't go up my nose. In fact, it may have been icing sugar."

On the City of Portsmouth
"Too full of drugs, obesity, underachievement and Labour MPs."

On tennis
"I love tennis with a passion. I challenged Boris Becker to a match once and he said he was up for it but he never called back. I bet I could make him run around."

On the Labour Party (or Papua New Guinea)
"For 10 years, we in the Tory Party have become used to Papua New Guinea-style orgies of cannibalism and chief-killing, and so it is with happy amazement that we watch as the madness engulfs the Labour Party."

On the Liberal Democrats
"The Lib Dems are not just empty. They are a void within a vacuum surrounded by a vast inanition."

A Frustrating Sideshow

I have not written any posts on the Democratic primary battle because I had hoped things would have settled down by now. How wrong I was. In fact, these past few months have been quite depressing. Last year I was very optimistic about the Democrat's chances at taking back the White House. Now I see that golden opportunity vanishing every day this war between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama drags on. For years the Democrats have been more united than I've ever seen them over issues like the failed war in Iraq, the outing of a covert CIA operative, the torture of detainees, the illegal wiretapping of Americans, and the political firings of the U.S. Attorneys. All those subjects have been excellent fodder for the liberal blogosphere and left leaning media in general. But for months now Clinton and Obama, along with their supporters, have been clashing as if they belong to different parties. It's been a frustrating sideshow of media hype and internal squabbles. Meanwhile, all the critical issues that voters really care about have been ignored while the fighting and bogus "reporting" continues. I just hope that the superdelegates will decide on a candidate before the convention so we can get on with the real fight against Senator John McCain. Voters must be reminded over and over that supporting McCain will only result in another four years of George W. Bush policies. And the only way we can convince the voters that McCain would be a disaster is to have all the Democrats united under one ticket. Let's hope that day comes real soon.

The Real Grave Threat to Peace

On October 7, 2002, President Bush gave a speech in Cincinnati, Ohio, in which he called Iraq a grave threat to peace, and that "knowing the designs and deceptions of the Iraqi regime, we have every reason to assume the worst." Today, five years after the U.S invasion of Iraq, as U.S. and Iraqi body counts continue to climb, the conclusion of this bloody occupation is nowhere in sight. A few weeks ago, President Bush claimed the Iraq war was "noble, necessary and just" even though the initial rationales for war -- stock piles of chemical and biological weapons, an active nuclear weapons program, and direct links to al Qaeda -- have turned out to be false. Bush remains steadfast in defending his decision to invade Iraq despite all the horrible consequences. If the U.S. had kept the inspectors in Iraq instead of invading, it's hard to imagine Saddam Hussein killing between 82,591 -- 90,115 Iraqi civilians, or 4011 U.S. troops. It is unlikely that 1 in 5 Iraqis would have been forced to flee their homes for neighboring countries like Syria. And, of course, who can forget the billions of dollars already spent on this never-ending war. But none of that really matters to President Bush. He lives in his own version of reality -- one where future historians will revere him as another Abraham Lincoln or Winston Churchill.

And then there's John McCain. The Arizona Senator has made his support for the initial invasion and continued occupation, a cornerstone of his campaign for the Presidency. He has also hinted that Iran could be the next target of U.S. military action (see "bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran"). The question is, has John McCain learned anything from the tragic destruction of Iraqi civil society under the guise of "protecting" the United States from some perceived threat? Unfortunately, no. Senator McCain is banking on the same currency that has served the Bush administration so well in the past: fear. Playing the fear card means never having to tell the complete truth. McCain has been claiming repeatedly that al Qaeda is being trained by Iran and then unleashed to attack coalition forces in Iraq. Although McCain did correct himself, one must understand that his deceptions are intentional. He is employing the same propaganda tactics used by the Bush administration to connect al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein as partners in crime. We must keep John McCain out of the White House. After all, he has already told us that there will be more wars. We must insist on peaceful negotiations instead of war. We must keep the option of war as a very last resort. This is why it's so imperative that we support the Democratic nominee for President come November, whoever it may be.

Millennium Celebration: America's Rapid Decline

Notes from Blighty – by Chris Cobb

Along with the Bechtels and Exxons and the private security firms of this world, one other group stands to profit from the successive administrations of Il Bush: future generations of schoolkids will thank him for making their lives a little easier. After trying to memorize all the important dates in American history that seem to be based on prime numbers – 1775, 1917, 1941, 1969 – they will come upon one more, the watershed year when the power of the U.S. began to decline. What could be easier to remember than 2000?

Along with the Bechtels, Exxons, private security firms and the students yet to come, I too celebrate the millenium year of 2000. I have made my peace with the decline of the U.S. as the wealthy superpower. At all odds it had to come; no state, no empire stays on top for ever. But the descent should have been gradual, like the beginner's slope, not freefall like the downside of the rollercoaster. History tells us it could take hundreds of years; after all, Rome wasn't burnt in a day. Fortunately the we will all be spared that. The decline will be precipitous and I couldn't be more pleased. The faster the firepower is removed from American hands the better off we'll all be.

If the latter half of the twentieth century proved one thing, it proved the U.S. cannot be trusted to act responsibly on the world stage. Behind the shibboleth of democracy we left a trail of right-wing dictators, cock-of-the-walk generals and a lot of dead peasants. The only honest government the U.S. ever put in power was the Taliban.

When future historians try to account for this sudden devaluation of American power they will focus on that one year. 2000 will be marked as the year that George Bush came along to give it a good healthy push. We should all celebrate.

England My England

When you come back to England from any foreign country, you have immediately the sensation of breathing a different air. Even in the first few minutes dozens of small things conspire to give you this feeling. The beer is bitterer, the coins are heavier, the grass is greener, the advertisements are more blatant. The crowds in the big towns, with their mild knobby faces, their bad teeth and gentle manners, are different from a European crowd. Then the vastness of England swallows you up, and you lose for a while your feeling that the whole nation has a single identifiable character. Are there really such things as nations?

From "The Lion and the Unicorn"
by George Orwell, 1941

It took me twenty-seven years before I finally returned to England to visit my Mother's family. I was brought there by my family for the first time when I was seven year old. The highlight of that trip was being personally fingerprinted by a Scotland Yard detective. Man, that was cool -- much more fun than watching the guards change at Buckingham Palace. I returned again with my Mother and my sisters when I was fifteen. That visit took place in the wake of John Lennon's shocking murder. That was not a very happy time for me. My Mom is from the city of Birkenhead which is just across the River Mersey from Liverpool. The Beatles landmark tour I embarked on for a few days in late December 1980 was a very bitter one indeed. I remember thinking how dismal the weather was, how the sun almost never came out the entire time, and how much I missed home. The food was bland and when you ordered a burger and fries, they charged you for the ketchup.

But I aways remembered England by the way the cities smelled. It was a burned brick and petrol odor that seemed to emanate from the very streets and buildings. It gave me a timeless feeling. It made me think of gigantic locomotive trains and towering double decker buses. The England I remembered was a patchwork quilt of green and browns, of hedgerows, dark brick row-houses, cobble-stone streets and narrow back alley outhouses. After the first week of our visit, I realized that, for the most part, England hasn't changed all that much. But we were not at all happy to see McDonald's, KFC, Pizza Hut and Starbucks in almost every city we visited. Yet the English still like to keep thinks low-key. And they cherish their history and take pride in their beautiful old houses and buildings. They don't like hideous billboards everywhere like we do, they prefer to drive on the wrong side of the road, they don't mind security cameras mounted in every corner of every big city, and they aren't afraid of a little nudity and profanity on the tube. Oh, and the biggest shocker of them all -- they've got Charles Darwin on their ten pound note!

When we get to England

When we get to England
Will we know when we've arrived?
When we get to England
Will we know if she has died?

Does the girl with the dogs
Still live in the big house
On the corner?
Are the boys collecting frogs
Still marching away
To die in war?

Like it's all from a dream
Like it's all from some history book
Did I look too hard
Did I miss something that I should have seen?
When we get to England
Will it still be there?

When we get to England
Will we know when we've arrived?
When we get to England
Will a kiss bring her alive?

Once a farmer in the field
Had to grow enough
To feed his family
Now they pay him for his yield
Just to burn it down
And throw away

Like it's all from a dream
Like it's all in a crystal ball
Did it fall so hard
Rest in pieces on a village green?
When we get to England
Will it still be there?

When we get to England

Andy Partridge