Let’s Not Talk American Elections

Instead, how about a wish list for after the elections and Inauguration Day as to things we would like to see from the next Congress and the Administration. There must be a list of things we would like to see that would be a pleasant change or new innovation over the current state of affairs or recent history. I, for one, would really think it would be rather nice for the United States Congress to pass a budget through both houses, especially with some encouragement and pressures from the Presidency. Then it would be an even greater surprise to have such a budget signed and actually be stuck with and spending to stay within the given limits. See, isn’t this fun. There surely have to be tons of other things we can add to the list and if I miss anything you might be wanting, then please add it in a comment. And now for a few more items we were able to put together.

 

It would be nice to have the United States be a leader in the world again, but not any of this leading from behind or being the cowboy on his high horse brandishing guns. Rather could we please have the United States lead by example, showing the world good management of government power and spending. Further responsible actions by the United States could include rewarding those who contribute to world peace, harmony and practice human rights while withdrawing trade and other economic interactions with those countries who act with malice and belligerence with their neighbors; spread terror and threats throughout their regions; deny their citizens their human rights, dignity, and pursuit of freedom and prosperity free of governmental interference with all laws established in an effort towards equal treatment for all and respect for all religions, races, genders and private proclivities.

 

It would be a difficult and daunting journey but worth the efforts to restore feelings of brotherhood and wellbeing between the different political factions within the United States and finally dismiss the tensions and distrust which have been the defining emotions of the 21^st Century thus far. There has been way too much animosity which definitely was evident from the number of commentators and spokespeople who often raged with flaming passions spiting fire and insult with every breath. It was evident even in the manner in which the news often was tainted more with high handed use of attitudes in place of simple facts. Hopefully we can soon watch the news expecting truthful information instead of the politicized propaganda that has been passed for news in the race to the elections. May we soon return to having one country where differences are discussed and not bandied as cries and hostilities. Basically, can we have a grace period replete with calm and pleasantries for a change.

 

Perhaps desiring the world, or even just the United States to turn from the bundle of puzzling inconsistencies and weird, unpredictable unknowns ruling our lives transforming into something that makes sense and offer an obvious and clear path forward is asking far too much, but if we don’t at least request we will never acquire such a world. May the voices of the least among us no longer be lost in the cacophonous din and instead ring clearly and be answered. If we could just have the actions of our leaders have a calming effect and the government at all levels no longer inflict calamity upon our lives. And lastly, can those who speak for us and to us speak plainly and no longer couch hidden meanings and speak in circles obscuring true intentions within doubletalk and newspeak. Plain, straight talk with sincerity and heartfelt compassions steeped in truth become the language of government such that they deal in a straightforward manner full of honesty and good tidings. Think of the joyousness and benefits which could be a new normalcy if we could just have a nation that lives up to the founding Principles of the United States.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

So Many Meaningless American Voters

Up front we encourage everybody who has strong, honest, compelling feelings about who they desire to win the Presidency to vote in the November United States Presidential Election. Vote in person or make the necessary arrangements to cast an absentee ballot. If you have strong feelings about a Township, City, County, State, Congressional or Ballot Issue that will be on the ballot, go vote and be heard. If nothing else, everyone who votes is heard even if it is simply as a number in a column in some registry that will be recorded for posterity, in this way your vote holds immeasurable value. But let us be rational and honest here. The vast majority of Americans voting in the Presidential race are casting votes which will have absolutely negligible if any impact on the election. If you live in the District of Columbia, Maryland, Massachusetts, or any number of true through and through Democrat bastions and you are voting for anybody other than the reelection of President Obama, you are wasting your time more than likely as these states are not in doubt. On the other hand, if you live in Texas, Oklahoma, Wyoming or any of the dyed in the wool Republican Strongholds, your voting for anybody other than challenger Mitt Romney is going to be meaningless.  By meaningless is that it will have absolutely no effect upon the final Electoral College vote. Sure, if Romney breaks 45% in Maryland or Obama breaks 45% in Wyoming, that will make news and there will be talk about how no State is truly out of the running and how candidates cannot take any State for granted, but that will be the limit of such a result. Such anomalies will be useful only to those of us writing editorial columns to use to denigrate the victory as being so very close and how the candidate could have lost or does not have such a mandate, but other than such posturing it will not make one whit of a difference.

 

None of this is of any surprise to most of us and is kind of liberating to an even smaller group. Among this small group are those who will be pounding their chests about their brave vote for some third party candidate and how they fought bravely against the two party monopoly. Humor them though I have a feeling there will be a greater number of such people this time around. It will not change the end result but it does mean there is some hope of real change coming. Some of us have felt this coming change for a while though not in sufficient strength to actually matter. Hopefully, that may be in the wind and blowing closer every day. There are two groups in our society who may be on the vanguard of such a change. One group are the true believers who may have thought the Occupy Wall Street Movement was the start of a new vision for the future. The other group is the combination of the Tea Party and the 9/12 Movement who are currently attempting to bring about change through the Republican Party and either will take over the leadership of the Republican Party or we may see the birth of a new political force named The Tea Party. But for this election, that day has yet to arrive. Despite the fact that this election will remain as a choice between the Democrat incumbent candidate and the Republican elite chosen candidate, the first election where a sea change may sweep in and surprise the establishment elite has begun as a small wave, a little swell in the middle of the ocean, but that swell, like its counterpart in nature, will possibly become a tsunami as it comes closer to fruition and crashes onto an election day shorefront in the near future. As many know, the two established parties have rigged the system so as to minimize any challenge to their preeminence and made the successful formation and election of a candidate from outside their ranks extremely difficult. There is evidence that there exists a large and growing number of Americans who have simply had all they are going to take from the corrupt two party system where a small elite cabal controls the path to election victory and power. The masses are growing restless and that can forge a new path to office and a new set of rules where for the time being the people’s will is heard and refuses to remain stifled.

 

In the near future we have the Presidential Election this November and a campaign in full swing. We will hear on the news almost nightly what one candidate or the other said today at some rally or in a press release or in response to questions from the press at a conference or when pressed at an appearance. Of course, depending on which news source you view, the slant will favor one candidate or the other. For most of us everything we hear will simply echo how we feel as most people tend to watch the news reports from people who share their views whenever possible. This trend has grown even more intense with the flood of choices between the internet and cable and satellite news sources providing both a wider range of choices and allowing a personal choice that is very tailored to one’s views. This has had two related affects upon the voting public. The first is new people often are so isolated into their particular viewpoint and do not receive any news or information which is contrary to their own viewpoint that they may actually start to believe that everybody believes as they do as they seldom if ever have cause to interact with news or people who hold differing views. This leads to the other effect which is an inability to understand or accept any results which are contrary to one’s seemingly universally held positions as such results run contrary to everything they have seen, heard or discussed with others. This is much of the reason why the American society has become so polarized and partisan. Most everyone has the ability to live in a closed world where everything with which they interact is a reflection of their beliefs and views. Some claim that this phenomenon is very debilitating as it secludes people from dealing with opposing views and leads to a more isolated existence insulating one from new or different ideas thus causing a kind of political and social tunnel vision. This is often exhibited by people expressing complete bewilderment when confronted with results from elections and such which are diametrically opposite of those which they expected. You will know you are witnessing such when you hear somebody claim, “This makes no sense because I do not know anybody who would have supported this.”

 

The most obvious side effect of this phenomenon is that the candidates for President only end up campaigning in those select States where the outcome is not yet a guaranteed known. President Obama is not going to waste his time attempting to gain a majority of the voters in Oklahoma or Wyoming as they are two of the most conservative States. Likewise, Mitt Romney is not going to spend much time in Massachusetts or Maryland as this would be a waste of his resources. What is possible is each candidate making appearances in States they already know they are going to win for two basic reasons. The first is they are guaranteed a huge turnout of wildly supportive and friendly crowds which will play well on the nightly newscasts. The second is that even though a Candidate is guaranteed to win a particular State, you do not want your supporters to think that you are taking their support for granted; you will want to spend some time, energy and resources as thanks for your support events in these places. To figure out which States are the ones where it is very possible that every single vote will be acutely important, just observe which States where both candidates spend the majority of their time, campaign appearances, advertising dollars, and have every locally known celebrity and politician hitting the stump for them and, of course, appearing with them giving laudatory speeches and introductions. The one advantage for those who do not live in what is called a swing state is that they do not have to suffer through the final ten weeks push with endless campaign commercials on their local television and radio networks. The local politicians usually only have sufficient funding for two or three weeks of such heavy hitting the airwaves while national candidates have not only their funding for commercials, there are Super PACs (Political Action Committees) running advocacy advertisements which are actually candidate ads carefully camouflaged in order to get around campaign laws and restrictions.  So, if you live in one of the swing states, you have our sympathy as you endure the last few weeks of being berated and barraged by campaign glitter, and the rest of you, enjoy the quiet and do check and see who it is that your fellow voters are going to choose so you do not get caught claiming, “Who won? How? I don’t know anybody so idiotic as to vote for them!” The rest of us will appreciate not having to explain and you very likely do not want to know why or how, just accept that they did win, even without the votes of anybody you know.

 

Beyond the Cusp

 

Update on Israel, Iran, EU, US, UN and the Rest

There were a few seemingly minor events this week which likely had a huge effect on the actions by the many varied players in the near future. Unfortunately or fortunately, depending on your views and proclivities, a confrontation with Iran has a likely rough time frame finally in place though only the decision-makers know for sure the exact timing. So, what were the events and influences and what are the likely ramifications?

The first item was seemingly a response to a prediction made right here at Beyond the Cusp where we predicted a high level Obama Administration person would be making a visit to Israel due to comments made by the Israeli defense minister in an article titled  Iran Nuclear Crisis Pits Barak Against Barack. The high level Administration official was Secretary of Defense Panetta who was already set for a trip to North Africa and Turkey, so a quick stop in Israel for a curt reprimand against self-inspired actions and a laying down of reasons why Israel was to heed and not try to run off leash. So, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta made his obligatory stop in Jerusalem, though how he found the Israeli Capital City using Obama Administration issued maps is simply an amazement, and apparently informed the Israeli leadership that his boss, President Barack Obama, did indeed have a plan for when military action vis-à-vis Iran would be deemed necessary. Panetta’s revelations were presumed to assuage any concerns which may have been irritating Israeli leaders into doubt of American resolve which might have them believing the United States is putting undue confidence in the efficacy of sanctions. The catch was the actual time-frame where sanctions might be brought into doubt and spur a more forceful persuasion was eighteen months, that’s right, a year and a half. For some unknown reason, upon hearing this news I have the distinct feeling the Israeli leadership was anything but assuaged.

In the days since our prediction of an imminent trip of an Administration enforcer to Israel there have been numerous hints and comments from any and every direction conceivable. There have been comments from the United States, almost all from unofficial sources, that have, with near uniformity, reinforced the theme that Israel has nothing to worry about as the United States is on the job of assuring that Iran will never possess nuclear weapons. The United States has been said to be so dependable on this that the Israelis can simply lay back and leave the prevention to US. As one might expect, these assurances and the Defense Secretary’s assuaging, even when reinforced by numerous unofficial sources, have not had the desired effect upon many in Israel.

This leads to the comments from the far side of the Mediterranean Sea which probably has been viewed by the White House as being less than helpful. Former Mossad chief Efraim Halevy indicated on Thursday that Israel is likely to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities in a matter of weeks. Aharon Ze’evi-Farkash, former head of the Israeli Military Intelligence Directorate, predicted on an Israeli attack on Iran Friday stating, “It could happen within weeks or months. There is a need to stop Iran’s nuclear program. I do not know if Israel plans to attack soon, the Prime Minister said the issue has not yet been decided. But the way I understand the big picture, it seems it will happen soon.” And for the topper, it was rumored that Prime Minister Netanyahu has reached a point of comfort with the necessity for him to make the decision concerning Iran and the Israeli responses, if any. And the European Union has pressed Catherine Ashton, as the lead of the P5+1, to persuade, nay, implore Iranian Chief Negotiator Dr. Jalili into further negotiations. There will be another round of negotiations which will result in the same standoff as before with Iran decrying that the West is simply dragging their heels in reaching the unavoidable conclusion that negotiations must recognize Iran’s right to nuclear research and utilization.

Making any prediction would be difficult, but the one thing that is becoming obvious is that the United States under the leadership of President Obama will not be taking any actions against Iran within a timeframe that would prevent their achieving nuclear status. The question, as far as the Administration of President Barack Obama is concerned, is can Israel be kept on leash and away from attacking Iran before the November elections. They are asking the wrong question for two reasons. The first is that as long as Israel has not attacked Iran all will be well going into the election. But, if it appears that Israel is still on the verge of taking action against Iran but being restrained by President Obama, many may be forced to consider President Obama’s foreign policy with an emphasis on his actions with Israel and interactions with Prime Minister Netanyahu. This could very well pose a problem for his reelection. Secondly, if Israel were to attack in September and be successful in destroying a reasonable percentage of the Iranian nuclear facilities with minimal losses of life on both sides and yet not start a huge war in the Middle East, then Iran will be completely off the table. This could even work in President Obama’s favor for reelection if he also took a position such that his threat of enforcing the Israeli attack should Iran respond, and Iran stand-down, then he could claim this was the plan all along with fair assurance that the Israelis would back his claim in gratitude for his backing, even if forced by circumstance. So, against the going logic and opinions of most of political punditry, an Israeli attack could be turned to President Obama’s favor. We will be able to see whether the second premise turns out to be true, as it is the most likely.

Beyond the Cusp