Obama's Moral Cowardice
Robert Manne on asylum seekers and the Left's failure
The perils of holding the balance of power
Metroid: Other M
As it Happens
WWII Vet Talks about the Power of Music
Obama vs McCain on Pollution Controls
Economic libertarian and solar-power entrepreneur T.J. Rodgers compares Barack Obama's and John McCain's respective plans for dealing with U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.

T.J. Rodgers is the founder and CEO of Cypress Semiconductor Corp. and the chairman of SunPower Corp, a manufacturer of solar-power systems. He holds a doctorate in electrical engineering from Stanford University and sits on the board of trustees of Dartmouth College.

Comments

Please log in to leave a comment.
You need to have been a member for 24 hours and validated your email before leaving a comment.
 
AUSTRALIANS VOTE HERE FOR THE NEXT US PRESIDENT
3 nov  |  Click here to exercise your global democratic right today! . . read more
What If...? - From the Outsider
1 may  |  What if none of the U.S. presidential candidates can win the next election? Obama because he is black and has an 'unAmerican' sounding name, Clinton because she is a woman and part of a tiring dynasty. And McCain because he is a Republican and... McCain. What happens then?

Do we have the second American civil war? Will some states want to secede from the Unitedness of it all? Will Bush hang in there for an extended second term 'in the national interest'? Will Mugabe ask for asylum?

Add to these nice concerns the impact of the recession-which-isnt-really-here-yet but will bite in the fall and the inevitable global tensions of a turbulent Beijing Olympics and you'd reckon on the message for 2009 being a right royal state of disunion. Get into gold or cash. Soonest. . . read more

Blonde Ambition: Hillary's Beserker Campaign - From Jeffrey St Clair
25 mar  |  Hillary Clinton can not win the Democratic nomination for president. The numbers tell the story. Even with robust victories in Pennsylvania, Indiana, West Virginia and Kentucky, Hillary will trail Obama in popular votes and pledged delegates as they enter the convention hall in Denver. Any other candidate would have been shamed into dropping out long ago. But these are the Clintons and they have no shame.

So why does Hillary persist? Because she hasn't abandoned her aspiration for the White House. Not in 2008, but for 2012. Here's the perverse logic at work. If Obama defeats McCain in November, it will take an act of treachery beyond anything even the Clintons have ever conjured from their grimoire of political demonology for Hillary to challenge him in 2012. She will be 69 in 2016, almost ready to move into one of the Beverly Nursing Homes, owned by a company she once represented as a corporate lawyer, aggressively protecting the bottom line against such extravagances as healthy meals, clean sheets and proper medical care for the elderly.

Hillary Clinton is the prisoner of an unimpeachable mathematics. So she makes the most of a remorseless situation by doing what the Clintons do best: commit political fratricide. Quite literally, in this case, by knocking off a brother. In order to realize her vaulting ambition, Hillary must mortally wound Obama as candidate in the fall race against John McCain so that she can run against McCain in 2012. [More] . . read more

Your Whiteness is Showing - From Tim Wise
9 jun  |  For those threatening to vote for John McCain or to stay home and increase the odds of his winning (despite the fact that he once called his wife the c-word in public and is a staunch opponent of reproductive freedom and gender equity initiatives...), all the while claiming to be standing up for women... For those threatening to vote for John McCain or to stay home and help ensure Barack Obama's defeat, as a way to protest what you call Obama's sexism (examples of which you seem to have difficulty coming up with), all the while claiming to be standing up for women... Your whiteness is showing.

When I say your whiteness is showing this is what I mean: You claim that your opposition to Obama is an act of gender solidarity, in that women (and their male allies) need to stand up for women in the face of the sexist mistreatment of Clinton by the press. On this latter point - the one about the importance of standing up to the media for its often venal misogyny - you couldn't be more correct. As the father of two young girls who will have to contend with the poison of patriarchy all their lives, or at least until such time as that system of oppression is eradicated, I will be the first to join the boycott of, or demonstration on, whatever media outlet you choose to make that point.

But on the first part of the above equation - the part where you insist voting against Obama is about gender solidarity - you are, for lack of a better way to put it, completely full of crap. And what's worse is that at some level I suspect you know it. Voting against Senator Obama is not about gender solidarity. It is an act of white racial bonding, and it is grotesque. [More] . . read more

Sean Bedlam - Obama vs McCain
11 jun  |  Australian video blogger Sean Bedlam on the American presidential election. Who will win the titanic struggle for control of America's foreign policy nightmares? . . read more
How Bush is Wiping Out McCain - From Alexander Cockburn
29 jul  |  Amid these very bad weeks for Republican John McCain’s hopes for victory in November, the cruelest blow of all is surely that President George Bush has decided to let McCain sink, without even pretending to toss a life belt to his fellow Republican. Two mean-spirited men by nature, Bush and McCain have never liked each other much and this natural animosity was fanned by the vicious nomination fights of 2000, when Bush routed McCain with salvoes of slurs, including one about a black “love child” supposedly disfiguring the senator’s escutcheon.

Both are now in poor political shape, with contradictory strategies for rehabbing their fortunes. The president is saddled with an approval rating bumping along in the 20s. Each day he is served another platter of contemptuous stories about “the worst presidency of modern times”, the lack of any enduring “legacy”, the approaching Democratic landslide that will put the Republicans in the wilderness for at least two terms...

The White House made no serious attempt to upend Obama’s trip to Iraq or excessively ridicule the harmonies from the Democratic candidate and Iraqi prime minister Maliki on schedules for U.S. withdrawal. Indeed noises that could be construed as acceptance of an accelerated schedule emanated from the White House... As final testimony to the huge disaster for the McCain campaign of Obama’s trip to Iraq, the floundering Republican candidate managed to shoehorn himself into talk about a rate of withdrawal from Iraq a good deal brisker than the 100 years of occupation he was talking about, or even the 2013 deadline he subsequently settled on. [More] . . read more

Candidates From Nowhere - From Bill Kauffman
19 apr  |  The last three major-party presidential candidates standing have this in common: the state abbreviations after their names - John McCain (AZ), Hillary Clinton (NY) and Barack Obama (IL) - are no more meaningful than the random pairings of letters in a spoonful of alphabet soup. These are the candidates from nowhere. Or in Obama's case, from everywhere. And this rootlessness has policy consequences.

Senator John McCain is a poster boy for the pathologies of the military brat. Born in the Panama Canal Zone, he attended twenty schools in his nomadic childhood. "The place I lived longest in my life was Hanoi," is how he shuts up critics of his carpetbagging, but he is making their point: Senator McCain's loyalty is not to any particular American place but rather to a bureaucratic institution (the military) and an abstraction (the American Empire)...

The Democrats are no more connected to particular places than is McCain. Hillary Clinton's rootlessness became a national joke in her 2000 U.S. Senate campaign to represent New York, a state in which she had never lived. Wearing a Yankees cap was about as far as she went to assert her ersatz New Yorkness. Barack Obama, lauded as the "world candidate," was born in Hawaii, a state that is only in the union because of its military significance. Raised also in Indonesia and at various times resident in Los Angeles, New York City, and finally Chicago, Obama is a "cosmopolitan"...

Why does this matter? What's wrong with electing competent but rootless people to public office? Because just as one cannot love the "human race" before one loves particular human beings, neither can one love "the world" unless he first achieves a deep understanding of his own little piece of that world. [More] . . read more

blogs   100words
 
By Sean Maguire

Obama 'ends' the Iraq war while body bags continue to pile up, Tony Blair weeps for the dead but refuses to apologise, Australians continue to fight in Afghanistan to secure a shaky government while Australia's shaky government fights for relevance.
 
With even our most inspirational politicians failing us, what is the point in having the audacity to hope?

Can we still be stupid enough to believe our problems will be magically solved for us?

And with the world stagnating in war, environmental collapse and economic inequalty has there ever been a better time for anarchy?