Have to get started. Work is piling up, but I feel utterly incapacitated by current events. One would’ve thought it had an energising effect, no? Not so.

Oh, and yes: Seeing state by state turning blue was a sight for sore eyes (that turned sorer and sorer by the hour, by the way). Even [...]]]>

Have to get started. Work is piling up, but I feel utterly incapacitated by current events. One would’ve thought it had an energising effect, no? Not so.

Oh, and yes: Seeing state by state turning blue was a sight for sore eyes (that turned sorer and sorer by the hour, by the way). Even the white snow in our garden acquired a certain bluish shade today. Whities turning to the blue party, huh?

The sky is blue, too, and here’s Ella for you, singing Blue skies – and then some:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvM_d90vff0

You had a dream, you said. Could this possibly be it? Well, it certainly took its time coming true, but here we are: 338 Obama electoral votes and a total of 53,516,786 votes – and counting (at 7:10 AM Norwegian time). This has to be it.

“The road ahead will be long. Our climb [...]]]>

You had a dream, you said. Could this possibly be it? Well, it certainly took its time coming true, but here we are: 338 Obama electoral votes and a total of 53,516,786 votes – and counting (at 7:10 AM Norwegian time). This has to be it.

“The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even one term, but America — I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there. I promise you — we as a people will get there,” president-elect Barack Obama told the hundreds of thousands attending the Grant Park celebration, and I’m sure he’s right.

But we’ve seen interview upon interview with American voters, politicians and dignitaries playing down the race issue, saying “the best candidate won, and yes, he’s African American,” but really, they cannot be serious:

Well, of course the best candidate won. There’s no doubt about that, but leave a little room for Doctor Martin Luther King’s dream, if you please, for surely, this has to be a great moment – for America and the world at large.

Congratulations, all. It was about time.

Dear Senator McCain,

I’m sure you’re a fine man, in every sense. Maybe not president material, but in every way a trustworthy, honest, through and through decent man, in whom I in fact recently regained some faith (in Norwegian) when you tried to stagger your running-mate’s crazed stampede against Obama only [...]]]>

Dear Senator McCain,

I’m sure you’re a fine man, in every sense. Maybe not president material, but in every way a trustworthy, honest, through and through decent man, in whom I in fact recently regained some faith (in Norwegian) when you tried to stagger your running-mate’s crazed stampede against Obama only weeks ago. And that’s not all:

I’m also quite grateful that you seem to have taken a sustainable stand in environmental matters, unlike the president currently in office and, again, your running-mate Governor Palin. There’s not a doubt in my soul that, although you voted with president Bush in so many cases, you represent an altogether different view on foreign politics and America’s place in the global community. If there’s any truth to your promise that you’re not Bush, I’m confident that, in supporting him, you were only being loyal. A fine quality in an old soldier like yourself.

Having said that, I fail to see a clear vision behind your policies, unlike your opponent.

In short: If you come out of this victoriously, I promise I’ll eat my… Breakfast tomorrow.

May the best man win.

With only three more days to go, the US presidential campaign has turned out to be a closer race than expected only weeks ago. Today, on the other hand, predicting the outcome is something very close to impossible.

So how did that come about? As I recall, news that Neo-Nazis Daniel Cowart and Paul [...]]]>

With only three more days to go, the US presidential campaign has turned out to be a closer race than expected only weeks ago. Today, on the other hand, predicting the outcome is something very close to impossible.

So how did that come about? As I recall, news that Neo-Nazis Daniel Cowart and Paul Schlesselman’s plot to “take out” Barack Obama and some 100 black people in a Tennessee killing spree about a week ago, turned out to be something of a turning point. Certainly, there’s been very little change in terms of pure politics, where Obama continues to appear a lot more confident than his opponent. If it hadn’t been for certain other factors, the gap probably would’ve widened, not narowed, as it were.

American Neo Nazi Daniel Cowart.

Of course there’s every reason to question the real threat posed by firearm-romancing Nazi kids, such as Cowart and Schlesselman, but it cannot be ignored. I’m guessing that, although a growing majority of the American electorate was in favour of Obama just a week ago, the two reminded them how unappealing the prospect of an assasinated president actually is. They don’t want to relive that. Better safe than sorry, eh?

And the gap started to close.

You can’t help but wondering though, if news that Muslim terrorists plotted to kill McCain would have the same effect. I’m afraid not – or rather; au contraire!

I’d just like to add this, though: With an ethnic breakdown of 80 percent white citizens, 12.8 percent African American, 4.4 percent Asian, 1 percent Native Americans and Alaskan Natives, 0.2 percent Native Hawaiians and Pacific islanders, 1.6 percent multiracial and 15.1 percent Hispanic or Latinos, there’s no democratic basis for demanding a black president. The colour of the president’s skin is completely irrelevant.

However, when presented with a dynamic, well-spoken and statesman-like candidate and/or one making faces behind his opponent’s back, I’d say the outcome is a given.

Unfortunately, however, it is not.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=jjXyqcx-mYY

Two years ago or so, as words between Iranian and US presidents Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and George W. Bush junior grew harsher, many of us feared a US invasion of Iran in the wake of the Iraqi war. It seemed a likely outcome at the time, with Bush accusing Iran of harbouring Iraqi insurgent leader [...]]]>

Two years ago or so, as words between Iranian and US presidents Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and George W. Bush junior grew harsher, many of us feared a US invasion of Iran in the wake of the Iraqi war. It seemed a likely outcome at the time, with Bush accusing Iran of harbouring Iraqi insurgent leader Muqtada al-Sadr – and of weapon supplies to the Iraqi insurgents. Luckily our worst fears didn’t come to pass in 2006, not last year and – up until now, not this year, but we were pretty damned close to a major catastrophe – several times.

In March and April 2007 things didn’t look good at all, when the Iranian navy took 15 crew members of British warship HMS “Cornwall” into custody. Later on, in September, experts were convinced that US vice president Dick Cheney was ready to bomb Iran, based on suspicions of an Iranian nuclear programme. Behind it all there’s the constant chance of an Israeli attack, brought into light again this weekend, by former British foreign secretary David Owen – in The Sunday Times:

Some key decision makers in Israel fear that unless they attack Iranian nuclear enrichment facilities in the next few months, while George W. Bush is still president, there will not be another period when they can rely on the United States as being anywhere near as supportive in the aftermath of a unilateral attack.

Nothing new therein, of course. There’s always been Israeli top officials in favour of an attack, but if Owen’s suspicions are founded by hard evidence, we’re looking at a conflict which is likely to make the war in Iraq seem like a walk in the park.

But I must add: When it comes to Iran, Israel and America, up until now there’s been much talk and no action. Let’s leave it like that, eh?

As we all know, US president George W. Bush’s plead for a USD 700 billion bi-partisan bailout plan failed yesterday. Quite a few Republicans attribute the failure to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who, apparently, did not stick to the original transcript for the speech she gave prior to the [...]]]>

As we all know, US president George W. Bush’s plead for a USD 700 billion bi-partisan bailout plan failed yesterday. Quite a few Republicans attribute the failure to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who, apparently, did not stick to the original transcript for the speech she gave prior to the congressional vote. I think I’d better quote Politico on this one:

[…] But anyone who looked at the transcript of Pelosi’s speech released by her office might have been puzzled by the complaints.

The transcript seemed relatively tame - with only relatively mild shots at the Republicans in the text.

But a review of the video of Pelosi’s comments shows the speaker deviated substantially from her prepared remarks when she stepped into the well of the House at about 12:20 p.m. Monday afternoon – delivering a series of ad-libbed jabs at President Bush and his party.

Have a look at Speaker Pelosi’s transcript here (The New York Times), then compare with her actual speech:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=n3J8HpoDDJY

Nancy Pelosi, a seasoned Democratic politician, wasn’t born yesterday. I suspect there’s every reason to believe she knew the outcome of her speech. Which only goes to show that Politico may be right in speculating that she indeed did ad lib doom the deal.

The remaining question, however, is: What did she think she’d achieve by doing so? Pave the way for Barack Obama? Granted, John McCain did a serious slip-up, by prematurely taking credit for the deal, but if further inquiries (I expect there will be some) show that Democratic concern for the American economy means less than a Democratic victory, I fear she may only have accomplished quite the oposite.

As my esteemed reader and avid commenter Finne igen remarks:

[…] There will be strong US in the future but no longer the sole super power, just one of the powers in league with China, Russia and some others. It is funny that every few decades or so the so called free market system needs goverment intervention of some sorts for the simple reason: free markets don’t work. Totally free markets do not benefit us all, just the greediest players, and that is why there must be regulatory system of the markets. What is also funny now is that in the US the people do not understand that unlike 1930′s there will be no credit for no one. US goverment is on debt for thousands of billions so the goverment is almost bankcrupt.

I fear he may be all too right in that assumption. But they (i.e. the Americans) may not be the only ones. Norwegian experts maintain that the crisis may already have landed on our shores, too (in Norwegian), which should come as no surprise, really. Or put in other words (again): When America coughs, the world gets a cold.

There’s no denying it: We tend to favour Barack Obama in these parts, or the Democrats, for that matter. Unfortunately we’re not allowed to cast our votes in the upcoming US election, even though some would argue that we really should be granted admittance, seeing as American politics affect us all.

However, there’s this [...]]]>

There’s no denying it: We tend to favour Barack Obama in these parts, or the Democrats, for that matter. Unfortunately we’re not allowed to cast our votes in the upcoming US election, even though some would argue that we really should be granted admittance, seeing as American politics affect us all.

However, there’s this thing that I just can’t seem to get my head around: Why is it that Europeans and Americans differ in so many political aspects? One would’ve thought we’d be a lot more alike, given the common cultural background, after all.

I won’t be so presumtuous as to expect American readers to visit, now that the blog is barely launched, but any thoughts at all are most welcome. Plese leave a comment.