Kiwiblog

Sad to read in the HoS:

President Barack Obama slapped punitive tariffs on all car and light truck tyres entering the United States from China in a decision that could anger the strategically important Asian powerhouse but placate union supporters important to his health-care push at home. …

The federal trade panel recommended a 55 per cent tariff in the first year, decreasing 10 per cent in each of the next two years. Obama settled on an extra 35 per cent in the first year, reducing by 5 per cent for two years. Beijing yesterday sharply condemned the US move: “China strongly opposes this serious act of trade protectionism by the US.

“This act not only violates the rules of the World Trade Organisation but also violates the relevant commitments made by the US Government at the G-20 financial summit.”

Protectionism may sometimes deliver short-term gain, but at the expense of long-term pain. NZ is a sterling example of this as we got rid of almost all tariffs and subsidies, yet up until the global recession had the lowest unemployment rate in the OECD. Protectionism doesn’t save jobs in the long-term, it merely keeps capital locked up in relatively inefficient industries.

To be fair to Obama, Bush was also a protectionist despite his rhetoric. He slapped tariffs on regularly, against WTO rules. They know they will lose at the WTO eventually, but do it to get through the election.

It is a pity, in terms of trade policy, that John McCain did not win. He was a very sincere and dedicated free trade supporter – his policy was to remove barriers to trade with every country on Earth, except those they have security issues with.

Later today I expect McCain to be beaten by Obama in the Presidential election. I thought it would be worthwhile to reflect on what may have been.

If McCain had been elected, he would have been one of the most independent Presidents in history. His legislative history as a Senator speaks for itself. His independence from some of the religious lobby groups would be especially useful – abortion and civil unions should not be the number one issue for a country.

America would have had its most ardent pro free trade President in history – McCain supportes free trade agreements with every country, except those they have security issues with.

On fiscal issues, Bush has left a disaster of a deficit, and McCain would probably have been pretty effective in reducing the deficit. Bush in fact has massively expanded the federal budget.

On Iraq, he was the main proponent of the surge strategy, that basically suceeded. The challenge would have been to then reduce numbers in Iraq over time so that the Iraqi Government can govern without the need of foreign troops. A McCain presidency would be given more time by am impatient public to withdraw. Obama may find it very difficult to reconcile the expectations of his supporters and the obligations to the Iraqi Government not to pull out too quickly.

It would be fascinating to know what would have happened if McCain had won against Bush in 2000 and then been elected againgst Gore. I suspect he would have been a far more sucessful President than Bush.

But his presidency will be the realm of “what if” writers as 2008 is not his year. It is a credit to McCain that he is still so close to Obama in the polls, when you consider only 10% of Americans say the country is heading in the right direction and 88% say the wrong direction. The candidate for the party of the incumbent should be miles behind. He won’t lose by miles but I don’t think it will be close either.

I blogged a couple of days ago about what Matt Robson said on Back Benches about John McCain:

As I said at the time:

They were talking about the US election and Obama and McCain. Wallace Chapman mentioned that McCain was around the same age as Jim Anderton, and Robson’s nasty littlre retort was:

But Jim can put his hands up over his head and claim victory, McCain can’t do that

How disgusting is that? To denigrate a man who is crippled due to years of torture as a prisoner of war? From Wikipedia:

In August 1968, a program of severe torture began on McCain. He was subjected to rope bindings and repeated beatings every two hours.

Some of the injuries came from his initial treatment when shot down:

Some North Vietnamese pulled him ashore, then others crushed his shoulder with a rifle butt and bayoneted him.

Now this is a war crime and against the Geneva Conventions. Robson has spent a lifetime going on about the Geneva Conventions, and war crimes, but then shows his real colours, by justifying the torture of McCain (after Paul Quinn pulled him up for his offensive comments), and bayoneting of a wounded surrendered solider on the basis that McCain had taken part in a war that killed a lot of people.

Now above is the video extracted onto You Tube, so people can easily judge for themselves what Robson was doing. Prog Blog has ludicrously tried to argue Robson was referring to McCain not winning as why he would not be raising his hands in victory, but that is crap as Robson explictly refers to the inability to raise his hands. Prog Blog should be ashamed it is trying to defend such a loathsome comment from Robson.

It is worth remembering that Robson is the Deputy Leader of the Progressive Party which is a formal part of the Government. Wonder what Phil Goff thinks of his comments?

Two interesting statements from the Progressives:

The Herald reports:

Progressive leader Jim Anderton made an unorthodox and brazen pitch to the elderly yesterday for New Zealand First voters to back him.

He made the bid on the basis that the New Zealand First leader Winston Peters might not be re-elected to Parliament after a series of inquiries into donations to his party.

So Jim is saying Winston is goneburger, so vote for me.

But the real quote that needs more attention comes from Deputy Leader Matt Robson, appearing on Back Benches.

They were talking about the US election and Obama and McCain. Wallace Chapman mentioned that McCain was around the same age as Jim Anderton, and Robson’s nasty littlre retort was:

But Jim can put his hands up over his head and claim victory, McCain can’t do that

How disgusting is that? To denigrate a man who is crippled due to years of torture as a prisoner of war? From Wikipedia:

In August 1968, a program of severe torture began on McCain. He was subjected to rope bindings and repeated beatings every two hours.

Some of the injuries came from his initial treatment when shot down:

Some North Vietnamese pulled him ashore, then others crushed his shoulder with a rifle butt and bayoneted him.

Now this is a war crime and against the Geneva Conventions. Robson has spent a lifetime going on about the Geneva Conventions, and war crimes, but then shows his real colours, by justifying the torture of McCain (after Paul Quinn pulled him up for his offensive comments), and bayoneting of a wounded surrendered solider on the basis that McCain had taken part in a war that killed a lot of people.

People should look at the video at the link above (just after halfway in chapter one) and see how gleeful Robson is in mocking McCain’s injuries and how unrepentent he is when challenged on it.

<!– /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:”"; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;} @page Section1 {size:612.0pt 792.0pt; margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; mso-header-margin:36.0pt; mso-footer-margin:36.0pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} –>

PM.National sold at just under 74c most of last weekend. At 6 pm when TVNZ announced they had a exclusive story on John Key’s undisclosed Tranzrail shares, PM.National dropped to 71c by 6.30 pm.

The release of the Privileges Committee report into Winston Peters saw a recovery, followed a dip again the next day when he got mauled during question time, resting at 72c.

It stayed at 72c on Wednesday and Thursday, and Friday’s favourable poll results in the NZ Herald pushed PM.National up to a healthy 76c again.

<!– /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:”"; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;} @page Section1 {size:612.0pt 792.0pt; margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; mso-header-margin:36.0pt; mso-footer-margin:36.0pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} –>

Peters.Resign share price has plummeted as it became apparent that not even a finding that he had filed false returns by the Privileges Committee and a parliamentary censure would cause Helen Clark to sack Peters. Peters.resign was over 50 c during the weekend and peaked at 65c as rumours of the Privileges Committee findings surfaced. But then PM Clark was reported as saying she was unlikely to act as the process had been tainted and the stock fell to 33c by 6.30 pm Monday night.

The Privileges Committee report was so damning that the prices rose again 57c, but then over the next few days has just declined constantly, reaching a low of 18c reflecting the market consensus that Clark will never sack him.

MP.Peters has also been in decline. The stock rose to 44c, but the Privileges Committee report saw it drop from Monday evening onwards, hitting a low of 32c on Thursday.

The new Benson.Pope stock (on whether he will stand as a non Labour candidate) was floated on Monday at 80c, and this ha proven to be a good float price, as the price has only ranged between 77c and 83c since then.

<!– /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-parent:”"; margin:0cm; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-fareast-font-family:”Times New Roman”;} @page Section1 {size:612.0pt 792.0pt; margin:72.0pt 90.0pt 72.0pt 90.0pt; mso-header-margin:36.0pt; mso-footer-margin:36.0pt; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} –>

Also launched this week were the US.Obama and US.McCain stocks. US.Obama was snapped up at 50c quickly hitting 64c before falling back to 56c where it spent most of the week. As the financial situation gets worse in the US, Obama’s chances have increased and his stock has climbed further to 60c.

Overnight polls give the first debate to Obama.

McCain faces problems on three fronts:

1. Being the party of the incumbent, especially in light of the financial crisis
2. Palin does not appear to be coming up to speed quickly enough
3. A sub-standard debate performance

I purchased some Obama stock at 58c last week. It is still only 59c and I think under-priced. To some degree I think the election is now Obama’s to lose.

News that the US is looking to join an existing agreement between New Zealand, Chile, Singapore and Brunei and turn it into a five way free trade pact is excellent news.

Helen Clark and Phil Goff should be thanked by everyone for the work they have done in the free trade area. Their record in this area has been highly admirable.  They have moved Labour away from its protectionist roots, so that the only anti free trade parties in Parliament are New Zealand First and the Greens.

It is important to note this is only a first step. An actual deal is some years away and will have challenges such as a change of President and getting through Congress.

Danyl has suggested that Helen Clark may have sold her vote to George W Bush on letting India legally develop nuclear reactors, in exchange for this free trade deal. If this is true, then again Helen deserves praise for getting such a high price tag for NZ’s pro-nuclear vote.

If John McCain becomes President, then I there is no barrier to the FTA. He is in favour of FTAs with literally everyone but Cuba and North Korea.

Obama’s rhetoric has been strongly against free trade. Will he pressure a Democratic controlled Congress to accept it, even if there is short term pain to some of their constituents?

Anyway this is seriously good news, and let us hope progress towards free trade continues. Oh yes, and will someone ask the former Minister of Foreign Affairs whether he thinks this is good or bad news?

iPredict has launched three new stocks:

1. Benson.Pope – will pay out $1 if David Benson-Pope stands as a non Labour candidate in the 2008 general election. Has launched at 80c.
2. US.Obama08 – will pay out of $1 if Obama is elected President. Launched at 49.5c
3. US.McCain08 – will pay out of $1 if McCain is elected President. Launched at 49.5c

I’d say Benson.Pope gives a pretty good opportunity to make some money.

As both US presidential candidates try to position themselves as an agent of change in Washington, the Washington Times looks at the legislative records of McCain and Obama to see who has been the best at working across the aisle with Senators from the other party:

Mr. McCain has been more likely to team up with Democrats than with members of his own party. Democrats made up 55 percent of his political partners over the last two Congresses, including on the tough issues of campaign finance and global warming. For Mr. Obama, Republicans were only 13 percent of his co-sponsors during his time in the Senate, and he had his biggest bipartisan successes on noncontroversial measures, such as issuing a postage stamp in honor of civil rights icon Rosa Parks.

So McCain has been able to team up with Democrats consistently and on bis issues such as campaign finance and globalwarming. Obama’s record is almost never working with Republicans except on non controversial issues such as postage stamps.

Thanks to the hurricance, both Bush and Cheney miss the convention, and have an unassailable reason for doing so.

I’m off to the United States Embassy to watch Barack Obama’s acceptance speech. It is going to be an incredible moment, regardless of the fact I don’t like his policies. It is a milestone for the United States to have an African-American candidate for President, when just one generation ago they had segregation.

So offline most of the afternoon, but any breaking news I can blog from my blackberry. I’ve been doing that a lot this week.

I’m at the Embassy next week also for McCain’s speech. He should be announcing his Vice-Presidental candidate over the weekend, which will be fascinating. The choice of Biden doesn’t seem to have changed the polls much. I am picking a big spike after the speech today.

Oh one has to give Bill Clinton full marks in his careful use of language, where he declared Barack Obama the best man for the job of President of the United States. That is, well, just so Clintonian! Both can’t fault either of their speeches.

A short video showing what Democratic VP nominee Joe Biden said earlier this year about Barack Obama and about John McCain. Nothing better than quoting someone back at themselves.

Hat Tip: New Zeal

The latest Reuters poll has McCain 5% ahead of Obama. Now one should not take too much from one poll, but the RCP average of all polls has Obama’s lead over McCain down to just 1.2%.

Much more significantly is the electoral college count, and for the first time ever, McCain leads – by 274 votes to 264 for Obama. It is too close to call of course, but what is significant is the race is now becoming too close to call.

Obama will be picking his VP next week and ten have his convention. I suspect he will get a huge boost from the convention – especially as his address will be to 65,000 people in a stadium.

Then we get to hear McCain’s VP and his convention. He will then get a boost in turn. Around mid September the polls may start to give us some idea of how the final race is looking.

Obama has been refusing to go head to head with McCain, despite earlier areeing to do so. This editorial may give an idea why:

The stark differences between the two came through the most on the question of whether there is evil in the world. Obama spoke of evil within America, “in parents who have viciously abused their children.” According to the Democrat, we can’t really erase evil in the world because “that is God’s task.” And we have to “have some humility in how we approach the issue of confronting evil.”

For McCain, with a global war on terror raging, there was no equivocating: We must “defeat” evil. If al-Qaida’s placing of suicide vests on mentally-disabled women and then blowing them up by remote control in a Baghdad market isn’t evil, he asked: “You have to tell me what is.”

Fair point.

Asked to name figures he would rely on for advice, Obama gave the stock answer of family members. McCain pointed to Gen. David Petraeus, Iraq’s scourge of the surge; Democratic Rep. John Lewis, who “had his skull fractured” by white racists while protesting for civil rights in the 60s; plus Internet entrepreneur Meg Whitman, the innovative former CEO of eBay.

Bland answer No 2.

When Warren inquired into changes of mind on big issues, Obama fretted about welfare reform; McCain unashamedly said “drilling” — for reasons of national security and economic need.

Always a good question.

On taxes, Obama waxed political: “What I’m trying to do is create a sense of balance and fairness in our tax code.” McCain showed an understanding of what drives a free economy: “I don’t want to take any money from the rich. I want everybody to get rich. I don’t believe in class warfare or redistribution of the wealth.”

Again Obama gives a bland response.

To any honest observer, the differences between John McCain and Barack Obama have been evident all along. What we saw last weekend was Obama’s shallowness juxtaposed with McCain’s depth, the product of his extraordinary life experience.

The question is will Obama be able to go all the way to election day with bland generalisations about fairnness and change. Possibly he will.

Deborah Coddington lets loose on John Edwards:

… since American politics – whether we like it or not – impacts on the world – we should all be grateful to this woman who has exposed Edwards as a liar, hypocrite, narcissist, and, ultimately, misogynist.

Edwards was always my least favourite Democratic candidate of the three of them.

It’s taken the “respectable” newspapers months to pick up on Edwards’ vainglorious behaviour. Broken first by the National Enquirer, it was ignored by the “mainstream media” until they finally conceded the tabloid was on to something.

It is worth recalling that the New York Times ran a massive story alleging that McCain may have had an affair with a lobbyist. There wasn’t any evidence of this affair, just suspicions yet that was enough to make their front page. But with John Edwards, they ignored the affair for months and months despite the fact it was well known around the beltway, and had been covered at length in the tabloids.

I just wish Edwards had beaten Obama. If the Republicans had been handed this delicious news in the middle of the presidential campaign, McCain would easily be seated in the Oval Office, and the prospects of free trade for our agricultural produce, and New Zealand’s economy, would get a whole lot better.

Even Phil Goff is saying that NZ will do better in terms of a trade agreement, if McCain wins.

I sometimes suspect Paris Hilton is smarter than her public persona. She has certainly out together a very funny video response to John McCain who criticised Barack Obama as being a big celebrity like Paris and Britney Spears.

I did quite like the McCain camps’ response:

“Sounds like Paris is taking the ‘All of the Above’ energy approach that John McCain has advocated — both alternatives and drilling,” spokesman Tucker Bounds told the gossip site. “Perhaps the reality is that Paris has a more substantive energy plan than Barack Obama.”

The crowd of 200,000 which turned out in Berlin to hear a mere candidate for the US presidency confirms that Obama is more a phenomenon than an ordinary candidate. I struggle to see how he will lose unless he majorly stuffs up. His flip-flops on the surge in Iraq are not going to be sufficient.

The speech was Obama at his best in a presentational sense. Almost every line drew applause. Now I can look at the content and be sceptical of such puffery as ridding the world of nuclear weapons and wanting Jews and Arab to work together, but as a candidate he can get away with such stuff. I do still wonder how he will go in office (ih he wins) when he has to actually make a tough decision.

But if he wins, it is clear he will be an extraordinarily popular United States President globally. And while they don’t vote, it will be refreshing to have a President who has global popularity. It may benefit both the US and Obama’s presidency.

But the flipside is the curse of expectations. When those tough decisions do confront Obama, and he does do something which is unpopular globally – the backlash may be even worse as people could feel a sense of betrayal.

Obama is only 4% ahead of McCain, but he will well ahead in the electoral college vote, and he is receiving twice as much coverage as McCain. This is arguably the result of an uncritical gushy media, but I can’t see it changing.

The latest JibJab – God those guys are good.

The HeraldNet reports from the US on allegations against Obama, including from NZer Trevor Loudon who specialises in links to communism:

Here are some things we can look forward to learning about Barack Obama:

That he was mentored in high school by a member of the Soviet-controlled Communist Party.

That he launched his Illinois state Senate campaign in the home of a terrorist and a killer.

That while serving as a state senator, he was a member of a socialist front group.

That his affiliations are so dodgy that he would have trouble getting a government security clearance.

The newspaper is sceptical, saying:

The Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy took a blow with Hillary Clinton’s exit. But it is regrouping, and finding plenty of sinister things to say about Obama — even if he didn’t trade cattle futures.

Hillary invented the term VRWC to describe her foes. If the VRWC is now targeting Obama, Hillary is probably funding them

“He’s a member of an organization (that is) openly a front for two socialist groups,” reported another participant, Trevor Loudon.

“Obama was raised and educated in a very Marxist-rich environment, which often would limit his worldview,” reported a third, Max Friedman.

In college, Obama “admits selecting Marxist professors among his friends and attending socialist conferences,” Kincaid went on. In Chicago, he said, “Obama launched his political career back in 1995 at the home of communist-terrorist Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn,” the two Weather Underground figures who have already made a cameo in the campaign. Kincaid then made the unilateral decision to accuse Dohrn of the 1970 killing of a policeman, a charge no prosecutor has made.

Personally I’m not too worried about communist influences when people were young. Hell Stephen Franks was a communist as a student and he has turned out fine

But I do hope the election in the US will focus on the policies, not just the rhetoric, of the two candidates. For example John McCain is staunchly in favour of genuine free trade agreements with as many countries as possible. Obama is not only against further FTAs but wants to renege renegotiate on the ones already signed such as NAFTA.

McCain is very good as he urges Democrats to not rush their decision, how cool it would be to leave their convention still not knowing who their candidate will be, and even saying in the interests of fairness he would be agreeable to have both Obama and Clinton on the ballot

A very amusing video song of all the things younger than John McCain. They include:

• GI Joe
• Barbie
• The AIr Force
• The CIA
• Snow White
• credit cards
• string bikinis
• The Pentagon
• Disneyland
• Coke in a can
• Batman
• Israel
• birth control (presumably just the pill)

It’s a bit nasty in one or two parts where they present McCain as confused and doddery, but overall it is an excellent use of humour.

Hat Tip: Whoar

Hillary Clinton, John McCain and Barack Obama finally debate the big issue in the United States – who will be WWE King of the Ring. Great fun – I thought Hillary did best. Of course in NZ we had Raging Bill English actually get into the ring!

Hat Tip: Lindsay A via e-mail

The video above shows John McCain responding to Letterman’s hassles about his age. Very funny.

Later in the show he is interviewed more seriously, and talks about how the Republicans partly lost in 2006 because they let spending get out of control, and uses as an example they authorised $3 million for the study of DNA of bears in Montana. He then quipped he didn’t know whether this was a paternity issue, or a criminal issue. Audience loved it.

Hat Tip: Rob Good

Before the Internet, Obama would have easily escaped the issue of his links to Rev Wright. No voter would have seen Wrights’s insanities and hate, and Obama’s ever changing lines would not be heavily scrutinised by the media who love him. And neither Clinton nor McCain could or would go near the issue.

But just as You Tube got the original videos seen, so we also see the first real attack video on Obama, and it is pretty effective. It make Obama look, well like an ordinary politician, and once he is reduced to that level, more focus comes onto his actual beliefs and policies.

The video isn’t done by any formal campaign, just by one of many of thousands of politically active people who have access to video editing technology. Now I am not saying the video is fair (it isn’t) but it is a reality that power has partly transferred from the formal campiagns to a wider array of activists. McCain has in fact sacked a staffer who merely forwarded on a link to the video.

Is it hurting Obama? Well look at the Gallup poll:

Plus the National polls are showing McCain ahead of Obama. And more critically in the big swing states of Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania McCain has an average lead of 11%, 7% and 2%. Now months to go and this will change but I am hearing the Republicans would now rather have Obama than Clinton as their opponent.

Susan Estrich has a useful column on this:

What the critics are saying, sometimes out loud but also in quiet whispers, is that they don’t understand how a man who gives speeches about moving past the racial divide would choose a racist minister to be a member of his family, about why, with all the churches in Chicago, Obama not only picked this one but remained true to it, about how he could not have known what others knew, could not have heard what others did.

The critics will tell you that blaming white America for spreading AIDS to blacks is not the same as an elderly white woman admitting that she is afraid of black men, and that there is a difference between standing by the grandmother who raised you and standing by a religious leader who preaches hate.

Personally I liked Obama’s speech on race, but I think the growing issue for him is his evasions. He at first claimed he had never heard Wright say the controversial stuff, and then it emerged he had. As with many scandals, it is how you react to them, rather than the original scandal, which proves lethal. Ask Bill Clinton.

NZ Herald Assistant Editor John Roughan discusses the US elections:

This is more than a fascinating election, it’s a joy to observe because all the serious candidates left in the race seem admirable in their own way. That may change now that Hillary has survived and will play rough to win. But the politics of mutual respect has been a rare treat.

I wonder if we could do it this year. We have two very respectable candidates for Prime Minister.

This is the one part when I think Roughan is in fantasyland. There is not even a small sliver of probability that Labour and Clark will not try and demonise Key.  I mean when Clark was asked on TV if she could name one positive thing about John Key, she couldn’t even manage that.

I watched John McCain on television when he clinched the nomination in Texas this week and it struck me that he offers something Clinton and Obama do not.

They promise “change”, by which they mean more than a change of party in power but possibly not much more than a change of the race or gender of the President.

Ignore their faces, listen to their rhetoric, and you hear fairly standard policy speak from Clinton and great oratory – but only oratory – from Obama.

Listen to McCain and you might wonder whether he is a politician at all. Open your eyes and the impression is confirmed. He fails all the superficial tests of US politics. He looks old, sounds soft, dresses badly, grins like a chump. And his speeches are modest, reasonable, almost self-effacing but firm and clear in commitments that are not necessarily popular.

Indeed McCain avoids the populist route.

In Michigan where the depressed car industry has left high unemployment, McCain alone had the courage to tell audiences, “the old jobs are not coming back”.

He believes in free trade which is reason alone to pray for his victory, especially when Clinton and Obama are playing up fears and suspicion of foreign competition and corporate behaviour.

They don’t mean it; trade fear is standard feed for the Democrat Party base who vote in primaries. Obama and Clinton have shown themselves to be conventional politicians in that sense, while McCain has stood up to a pounding from his party’s conservative core.

I think the pundits who claim McCain have no chance at all in the general election will be surprised.  I am not predicting a winner, but I think it will be a very competitive race.