How does Hillary Clinton matter?
I’ve avoided writing anything about the mechanics of the transition for a number of reasons. First, until yesterday, only a few of the major appointments had been announced, and nobody’s time would’ve been enriched by reading post after post of hyped-up speculation. Second, I think it’s mistaken to think we can interpret what these appointments will mean for the policy content of Obama’s presidency; Rahm Emanuel might stalk the political centre like an obsessive pitbull, but one can’t imply from Obama appointing him Chief of Staff that this herals a retreat to the cautious Clintonomics of the 1990’s. His presidency will be judged by actions in office, not by what comes before.
But the blogosphere abhors a vacuum, and when there’s hits to be had, and millions of eager tag surfers demanding to know what it all means, it’s not surprising that my silence hasn’t been shared by the leading commentators. In this rarefied world, there are three distinct interpretations of the decisions made so far. There’s the ‘liberal overboard!’ argument pursued by Chris Bowers, who opines that Obama’s already begun to betray progressives with his appointments. Then there’s the ‘get a gip’ retort from Glenn Greenwald, who insists that he’s never been a true blue progressive, and is merely picking people who are moderate technocrats like himself. And then there’s the third way favoured by E.J. Dionne, whose well-sourced piece argues that the supposed ‘choice’ between the progressive and centrist policy factions is a false one, and Obama is more likely to govern using a synthesis of both.
Defending the pub
If the plight of the humble British pub was in a bad shape at the time of writing this post, I think its safe to say that Alistair Darling’s decision to stick an extra 8% on alcohol excise duty will contribute to even more old-fashioned boozers being bankrupted.
Sniffing an opportunity to make nice with their alcohol-soaked community-minded constituents, posts have popped up on both LabourHome and Lib Dem Voice protesting the move and imporing the government to reverse the tax hike, less more small businesses be forced to call last orders for the final time.
continue reading… »
What about homophobia?
I suppose you should call this a work in regress. Back in 2003, the execrable, homophobic loon Bounty Killer weaseled out of some UK concerts after Peter Tatchell & OutRage! called for him to be arrested for inciting violence against gay people.
Five years later, the Metropolitan Police have decided that Mr Killer ain’t all that bad, and providing he doesn’t perform songs where he says things like ‘burn the queer’ (it’ll be a very short set, I guess), then they’re okay with him spreading what I’m sure is his primary message of peace, love & understanding.
Both Tatchell & Brett are completely correct to point out that if a musician tried to enter Britain with a songbook of ballads about white supremacy, he or she would struggle to find a visa, let alone a venue.
Maybe the soft, passive, ‘well, the last time he played a concert no gays were killed’ way of dealing with things has its merits, and if anyone has a clue what they are, I’d be happy to be enlightened. But I don’t see how we’re going to succeed in erasing homophobia when the police’s actions seem to imply that it’s less of a social evil than racism.
We’re burning up
This report (PDF) by ten of the world’s leading climate scientists (very briefly discussed here) has been causing a fair amount of worried hand-wringing on the environmental blogs, partly because of the very stark predictions it makes, but also because it renders the task of constructing an effective climate change policy more difficult than ever.
As I wrote earlier, the magic number used by climate scientists is 350 parts per million (ppm); that’s the maximum amount of carbon our planet can handle before the damaging effects of climate change take effect. At the moment, we’re at around 385, and that number is increasing by about 2 ppm every year.
As Bradford Plumer explains, until recently, climatologists have believed that stabilising the amount of carbon at around 450 ppm was the most realistic target for world governments to aim for, and if there was a concerted global effort to cut emissions 80% by 2050, then there’d be a good chance of us achieving that. We would still inevitably experience the damage of climate change, such as changes in weather patterns and rising sea levels, but it would at least avoid something far, far worse.
continue reading… »
Creating a more ‘responsible’ drinker
I was thinking recently that our approach to regulating the sale of alcohol has an uncanny resemblence to that whack-a-mole game my brother & I used to play in amusement arcades; one second you think you’ve smashed the problem of alcohol abuse, and the next it rears its head somewhere else.
Back in the day, the argument behind liberalising the licensing laws was that in order to ‘large it up’ or whatever, people were trying to cram their drinking into a pretty short period of time, and that was causing the apparent rash of mass leglessness you’d find in towns centres across the country. So, the theory went, extend the amount of time they’re allowed to drink and you might see some reduction in the ‘down it!’ culture that induces half the country into synchronised vomiting every Saturday night.
The audacity of hate
WASHINGTON (AP) – Federal agents have broken up a plot to assassinate Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama and shoot or decapitate 102 black people in a Tennessee murder spree, the ATF said Monday.
After we’ve gotten over the horror that comes from reading it for the first time, we would do well to remember that this is fantastic news. This isn’t the first time someone has plotted to rob us of Senator Obama’s life, nor will it be the last, and the security services are owed a tremendous debt gratitude for their commitment, skill and bravery in breaking these plots before they break America.
But a plot uncovered is still a plot that’s failed, and when you remember that there’s only a smattering of psychopaths who’d dream of committing such a crime, and even fewer who would act on it, I think it’s fair to say that the cause of violent white supremacy has been dealt a heavy blow.
Unions and fascists – show your support
Aside from that peerage for Peter Mandleson, this is one of the more irritating things to happen in the House of Lords for quite a while. Back in 2002 the rail union ASLEF was taken to court by one of its members after he was expelled for being a member of the BNP. He won, and so several years later ASLEF took the case all the way to the European Court of Human Rights and argued that the decision breached article 11 of the European Convention, which states:
“Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and to freedom of association with others, including the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.”
The court ruled in ASLEF’s favour by insisting that just as individuals have a right to choose whether or not to join a trade union, so trade unions have the right to choose their members.
continue reading… »
Colin Powell’s plea for decency
I don’t post Presidential endorsements on this blog because they generally have little impact on the course of an election. I make an exception here because Colin Powell’s endorsement of Obama is interesting on a number of levels. At its most basic, it happens to be one of the most eloquent, well-argued and persuasive endorsements the Senator has received, and at a time when both campaigns are transmitting nothing but white noise, it’s nice to hear a more thoughtful, measured assessment of the choices facing Americans.
But there’s a lot more going on here. Much of Powell’s endorsement is a plea for decency; whilst he softly stamps on the lie about Obama’s faith, he also attacks the implicit suggestion that there is something wrong with being Muslim, and speaks of a young Islamic American who was killed serving his country in Iraq. There is a tacit acknowledgement here that America’s public sphere is ailing just as badly as the economy.
continue reading… »
Why can’t we unionise lap dancers?
Personally, I’ve no use for strip joints, lap dancing emporiums, ‘gentleman’s clubs’ or any other euphemism you want to use for young ladies dancing around without much clothing. If I’m going for a drink I want a steady supply of cider, enjoyable conversation and a jukebox that’s as obscure as my music taste. What I don’t want to endure is the awkward, toe-curling, avert-your-eyes embarrassment of having women I’ve never met wriggle around for me (and yes, I realise it’s probably far more awkward for the women themselves than it would be for me).
But it’s obvious that a significant section of the male population doen’t share my squeamishness, and the industry has thrived in recent years. As others have explained better than I could, the government’s 2003 Licensing Act created a pretty huge loophole which left lap dancing barely regulated (excuse the pun), and the number of clubs has consequently doubled.
A séance with Richard Nixon
Nixon might be dead, but politics is a magnet for people who possess the same corruptible mindset. In a ruling that will surprise nobody, a committee of 4 Democrats and 8 Republicans found Sarah Palin guilty of abusing her position as Governor of Alaska in a bid to get her brother-in-law sacked.
The phrase ‘a heartbeat away’ has become so over-used that it now sounds like a shrill chiché, but in this case it’s useful to remember when considering the enormity of this ruling. What these events tell us is that John McCain believes Sarah Palin, who, like Nixon, has used the power of her office to persue petty personal grievances, possesses the competence and character to assume the Presidency. If I was an American, I’d be deeply insulted.
This report from Noam Schreiber is full of unsettling similarities between Palin and the author of Watergate: the inferiority complex, the class resentment, the deceit, treachery and vindictiveness. I don’t really agree with all the hyperventillating about this being the ‘most important election ever’, but I do know that the times are far too serious for a pernicious, superficial little hack who mutters malaprops and mangled talking points and can’t even manage the bare minimum commitment to ethics & integrity. America deserves better.
Palin scares Puffy
I’m sure the readers here are all savvy enough to know that rapper/actor/entrepreneur/wannabe Alan Sugar Sean ‘P.Diddy’ Combs ain’t scared of shit. A veteran of the mid-nineties Rap Wars, the onetime Puff Daddy made millions from reminding us that he’s a Bad Boy For Life, and with his reputation for unintentionally hilarious bust-ups in nightclubs, you get the feeling the dude could walk into a Mexican standoff armed only with a cucumber and still come out unscathed. continue reading… »
Hosing down the homeless
Forever fond of its grandiose targets, the government announced some time ago that it was going to rid the homeless from Britain’s streets by 2012, presumably so that when London becomes filled with Olympic tourists, the only shabby, downtrodden drunks they’ll encounter will be our nation’s pop stars.
In order to attain the frankly unattainable, the City of London Corporation has taken to sending outreach workers into homeless hotspots to persuade them to either enter a hostel or a drink/drug rehabillitation programme. If that doesn’t work, a council crew will turn up some time later to spray where they might’ve been sleeping with the odd gallon of water.
continue reading… »
Must be time of the month to oust Gordon!
Via Jess McCabe at The F-Word, those intrepid terriers at The Telegraph delve into the real reasons for rebellion against Gordon Brown and discover that it’s just a cabal led by a bunch of women who are emotional, irrational, and probably having their periods.
Here’s their expert analysis of Siobhain McDonagh:
She sounded like a woman facing an emotional crisis, not a government minister in the midst of knifing the Prime Minister.
Classy. Just in case you hadn’t noticed, conservatives are the new progressives….
Cambridge: still not getting it
So it appears that my alma mater is cooking up creative ways of appealing to the kids. As part of their eternal quest to encourage more state schoolers to apply to Cambridge, the powers that be have decided they need to revamp its somewhat staid, musty image and have contacted the makers of Eastenders, Top Gear and Dr Who to suggest ways in which the university can be featured.
The possibilities for further promotion are endless: they could ask the papparazi to snap Lily Cole enjoying a night in Kings’ Bar, ask a few dons to take up residence in the Big Brother house, or start a viral internet campaign featuring Borat (especially since his last visit went down so well). They could do all of this, and they might even be successful in driving up state school applications, but the onus is still on Cambridge to offer them places.
I’ve said before that this thing runs in a vicious cycle; when the number of state school students admitted is low and getting even lower, there’s not much encouragement for bright kids who have the grades but don’t think Cambridge is for ‘people like us’, thus depressing the number of applications further and giving admissions chiefs an even more shallow pool of talent to pick from.
The unfortunate truth is that short of shutting down private schools altogether (a proposal which would probably cause mass middle class migration, if anyone took it seriously), there aren’t any easy or quick solutions to getting more state school & underprivileged students into Oxbridge, particularly, as Heather McRobie notes, when the interview system already gives private school kids an advantage over their less privileged peers. But by ramping up their attempts to attract new applicants without being seen to have addressed why so few of them are being accepted in the first place, Cambridge’s access department does seem to be putting the cart before the horse somewhat.
‘The biggest gamble in American political history’
That’s how Republican pundit Pat Buchanan describes John McCain’s choice of Sarah Palin as his running mate. Palin’s executive experience amounts to a year and a half as Governor of Alaska, which should render McCain’s ‘Obama is inexperienced’ jibe as rather useless. Her foreign policy experience is also non-existent, which will make for an interesting debate when she goes up against Joe Biden.
From the same Politico article linked to above, here are some of the supposed advantages of having Palin on the ticket:
In her short political career, Palin has become known – at least in Alaska — as a reformer. Long before the ethical problems of the Alaska GOP were front-page news in Washington, she was working to clean up the state’s government and her own party.
As a member of Alaska’s Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, Palin pushed an investigation that ultimately led to the state’s GOP party chairman to resign from the commission. Earlier this month, she endorsed Sean Parnell, who is still waiting to hear whether he has defeated ethically challenged Rep. Don Young in Tuesday’s GOP primary.
So in picking Palin, McCain accepts the framing of this election as being about change, and picks a genuine outsider who – superficially, at least – appears to offer a tough approach on ethics reform.
Anyway, enough from me. Here are some media/blogosphere reactions:
What do you mean by ‘anti-Americanism’?
You know times are tough for a global superpower when someone devotes a large amount of time and money producing a blog in solidarity with you.
America in the World is a new project from Conservative Home’s Tim Montgomerie which aims to act as a bulwark against anti-Americanism by dispelling myths, extolling the country’s virtues and arguing that a world without America as a dominant force is not a notion anyone should want to entertain.
If done right, the site serves a decent enough purpose, and the content certainly seems well-researched and attractively designed. But the sticking point was always going to be how they define anti-Americanism, and in this respect they threaten to alienate a significant number of people.
continue reading… »
Whitewashing Beyonce
The image on the left shows the singer Beyonce Knowles as she normally appears in public. The image on the right is from a L’Oréal ad campaign. Spot the difference.
Now, the company insists they didn’t digitally alter Ms Knowles complexion in order to make her look more white, and while this stretches the limits of credibility I suppose it’s possible that they achieved it through the use of make-up and clever lighting. Either way, the image on the right is vastly different to what Ms Knowles actually looks like; she appears far more light-skinned and the only way they could’ve done this is through some sort of manipulation.
Since the ‘natural’ Beyonce is no slouch in the looks department, it’s natural to suspect sinister intent.
continue reading… »
Understanding British law, with Melanie Phillips
You’ll all know by now that policies are complicated things. They use Big Words and Complicated Jargon. They come in large PDFs, and not only do you have to read the whole thing, but you’ll need access to other reading materials to make sure you understand context, history and competing points of view.
Phew, that’s enough to work anyone into a sweat – thank God no one actually writes about policy anymore!
Well, one brave woman still does. Ever the wonk, Melanie Phillips has forensically studied the details of the proposed changes in murder law and, for her policy-averse readers, managed to summarise it in just 34 words.
To quote The Knowing One, the proposals:
as far as I can see, will mean that if a woman kills her husband she will get away with it whereas if a man kills his wife he will be convicted of murder.
An open primary for London
In the past few months, we’ve heard a lot about what Barack Obama’s presidential campaign could teach British progressives (indeed, I’ve been more guilty of that than most), but too much has been vague hypothesising and rueful ‘what ifs’, rather than a practical sense of how to get started.
So I think Sunder Katwala’s support for an open primary to choose the next Labour candidate for Mayor of London is a really positive first step.
There’s much in the mechanics of the Obama campaign (and the US netroots in general) that we can admire and wish to transplant into British politics, but as none of it has ever been tried before, we’ve no idea whether it would work in a country that appears to have a more cynical, less involved approach to politics than you’ll find in America.
At the very least, having an open primary in London would give us the opportunity to road-test methods like online fundraising, organising and building a movement that tries to reach as many people as possible (ie, not just Labour activists) and bring them into the tent.
If it doesn’t show any signs of success in Britain’s biggest city, then there’s not much hope for the rest of the country. However, if progressives do find some positive signs from the attempt, there’s hope that the process of choosing mayoral & parliamentary candidates could one day be more open, inclusive and, yes, democratic.
About that Obama ‘terrorist’ cover
When the weather gets warm (at least, that’s the rumour) and journalists & bloggers are stuck in a drought. Try as I might, I can’t find the rage required to get worked-up over this:
Seriously, if you can’t mock the mad right’s lunatic & racist portrayals of Obama in the archetypal liberal arts & current affairs magazine, when and where can you do it?
continue reading… »
You can read articles through the front page, via Twitter or rss feeds.
» How bad is the feline obesity crisis?
» Why don’t MPs pay back tuition fees instead of increasing ours?
» Obama is right to slam BP – and why capitalists should too
» Why does Phillip Blond see civic cohesion as a security issue?
» So what if the Labour candidates went to Oxbridge?
» Last night’s Labour hustings: will it get interesting or turn to torture?
» It’s now down to Ken to win London for Labour
» The Labour people need
» Blog Nation: what would you like to see discussed?
» The Labour leadership’s token contender.. and it’s not Diane Abbott
» In defence of these fraternal nominations
|
66 Comments 20 Comments 13 Comments 10 Comments 18 Comments 4 Comments 25 Comments 49 Comments 31 Comments 16 Comments |
|
LATEST COMMENTS » McDuff posted on Why I'm defending Ed Balls over immigration » damon posted on Complete tits » Sunny Hundal posted on Complete tits » sunny hundal posted on Why don't MPs pay back tuition fees instead of increasing ours? » Lee Griffin posted on The Labour leadership's token contender.. and it's not Diane Abbott » dan posted on Defend the urban fox! » Richard W posted on Boris rise for Living Wage left of Labour » Julian Swainson posted on How many cabinet MPs went to private schools? » sally posted on Complete tits » Joanne Dunn posted on How many cabinet MPs went to private schools? » Lovely Lynnette Peck posted on How many cabinet MPs went to private schools? » Nick posted on Why don't MPs pay back tuition fees instead of increasing ours? » Bob B posted on Complete tits » Nick posted on Complete tits » Mike Killingworth posted on Complete tits |
