Obama vs. Osama......

 

I asked Hay Texas for his take on two recently-published books that cast doubt on Obama’s role in the killing of bin Laden, one asserting that he dithered 3 times before Hillary forced his arm, written by a known right wing controversialist; the other, by a former SEAL that the events were not as described and had been hyped.

 

Here is his response.

 

We are familiar with the issues you brought up about O's role in offing bin Laden. There is a lot of scuttlebutt floating around over the incident and what with a new book just out telling a radically different story, people don't know what to believe. I anticipated different versions of the story from the beginning and still anticipate more variations over the years ahead. Some people are better at lying than I am at telling the truth.

 

Moreover, lying can be a highly remunerative business.

 

My instinct is that the plan for the Navy Seals was executed as stated just after the incident. O was called in from the golf course when it came time to enter bin Laden's compound. The Seals had cameras attached to their helmets and the President, Hillary, military brass, the Secretary of Defense and others were watching every move via satellite.

 

There is no question in my mind that O had the courage to order someone to pull the trigger. Indeed, he admits regularly overseeing and approving assassinations of known terrorists by drones and undoubtedly other means.

 

There must have been trepidations over two major issues. First, would the mission succeed and second what would the reaction be in the Middle East. Certainly, failure scenarios were prepared and evaluated among strategists. I expect O's greatest fear was a repeat of the disastrous effort by President Carter to raid the American Embassy in Tehran and free the hostages being held their.

 

On this note, Carter got full blame for the failure and by the same token, I and most Americans give O full credit for the success of offing bin Laden. Everyone knows that neither President had anything to do with the actual events.

 

As for Hillary, I expect she advised O on the impact of both success and failure among our Arab and Middle Eastern friends and enemies. I can imagine O dithering over these impacts. He definitely needed to avoid an irreversible diplomatic row with Pakistan.

 

 

Whatever may have been said by Hillary, the ultimate decision to go was, in my opinion, that of O.

Is 'Fairtrade' fair?

 

Despite its ‘do-good’ presentation  is Fairtrade really a marketing exercise.  

 

It offers only a very small number of farmers a higher, fixed price for their goods. Simple economics will tell you that these higher prices come at the expense of the great majority of farmers who are left even worse off because the Fairtrade subsidy unbalances normal market forces.

 

It stands to reason that if you subsidise an internationally traded commodity to some producers but not all, the subsidised growers will be able to undercut the non-subsidised.  This in turn encourages over-production and is a disincentive to agricultural improvement. Many of the farmers helped by Fairtrade are in Mexico, Argentina, and other relatively developed countries.

 

We recently bought oranges that we later discovered were marked ‘Fairtrade’. They came from Argentina which has a higher GDP PPP than Poland, Belgium, Austria, Sweden, Switzerland, Greece and Portugal in the top 40 richest nations. And it is blindingly obvious that oranges in European supermarkets don’t come from poor peasant farmers. They come from large commercial  estates.

 

 

The Co-op sells ‘Freetrade’ wine from South Africa. This is one of the wealthiest sectors of the South African economy

 

It doesn’t help economic development. It keeps the poor in their place, sustaining uncompetitive farmers on their land and holding back diversification, mechanization, and moves up the value chain. Just 10% of the premium consumers pay for Fairtrade actually goes to the producer. Retailers pocket the rest.

 

Fairtrade arose from the coffee crisis of the 1990s. This was not a free market failure. Governments tried to rig the market through the International Coffee Agreement and subsidized over-plantation with the encouragement of well-meaning but misguided aid agencies. The crash in prices was the inevitable result of this government intervention, but coffee prices have largely recovered since then.

 

However, it probably helps the liberal-minded to feel that they have done their bit to save mankind without actually exerting themselves. For ourselves, we refuse to buy anything marked ‘Fairtrade’, ‘organic’ or ‘GM free’.

What is courage?

 

I started to watch a TV documentary called ‘Our War’, made on patrol in Helmand  by the soldiers themselves using helmet-mounted cameras. I gave up half-way through because I suddenly realised I had seen the young officer’s photo in the media after he had been killed. Watching with that knowledge would have been gut-wrenching.

 

I began to reflect on the nature of physical courage. What is it that inspires young men and women to constantly expose themselves to often violent death?

 

My old friend Rear-gunner Ron was a tail-end Charlie in Lancasters for 3 years during WW2. His outfit – 33(Rhodesia) Squadron (but with only one Rhodesian left) flew ‘window’ missions, dropping metal strips that messed-up Jerry radar. This was particularly dangerous because they went ahead of the main bombing force (but at least they never killed anybody). A colleague completed nearly 80 sorties in Bomber Command. Another did 2 tours – 60 missions. The life expectancy was 10 missions.

 

How do you cope with putting yourself in harm’s way like this day after day for years?

 

It may be that some people really are fearless. I remember an old test pilot saying that the essential qualification for his job was a complete lack of imagination.

 

In his memoirs a former commander in Afghanistan expresses his admiration for young soldiers going out on patrol and vomiting with fear, but carrying on regardless.

 

I guess that real courage is not being fearless but going on when you are scared to death.

Romney, rape, and skinny-dipping........

 

Mitt is busy casting moral judgements on American politicians.

 

One of our House members,Republlican Kevin Yoder, while on a junkett in Israel, decided to swim naked in the Sea of Galilee. His co-workers were reportedly aghast, but not as indignant as Mitt who resolutely condemned the politician and his antics. Word is, Yoder is likely to survive the incident even after, as one commentator put it, having gone wild in Israel.

 

The junkett itself is interesting in that some 60 congressmen and their staff and families were involved in the visit. Yoder's move, even though it was dark, was seriously ill-advised. He has since apologized amid cheers from nudist groups and growls from the Romney camp.

 
In another instance, Mitt chastised Rep. Todd Akin who is now running for a senate seat from his home state, Missouri.The other day, Akin claimed that women's bodies shut down after being raped and thereby do not produce a child. This bizarre opinion caused an outburst among the public, the media and indeed our Mitt. Even though Todd is a Republican, Mitt insisted that he drop out of the race, which Todd did not do.

 

Mitt has been taking a lot of moral umbrage lately and while he has strong values, he may have crossed the line into Puritanism.

 
And we certainly don't need another puritanical epic here in America.

 

One female commentator opined that Todd is not the first male to have difficulties navigating through a woman's reproductive system and won't be the last. Todd was not fazed by the tons of negative publicity and is determined to continue his campaign. He claims to have been taken out of context when quoted in the media.

 

The Todd Akin drama gives rise to the more important issue of controlling the House and Senate. If O wins the election, but the Republicans have majorities in the House and Senate, then they will be able to delay if not kill legislation inspired by O.

 

 

This scenario may prove to be the best the Romney camp can get as O remains strong as the people's choice.

'Just wild about Harry!'

‘We know no spectacle so ridiculous as the British public in one of its periodical fits of morality’.

 

Shock…….horror. Young army officer (27) photographed in hotel room without any clothes plus another in the same state of nature, believed to be a young woman. May have committed or be about to commit a heterosexual act.

 

The pink smudges of Captain H Wales plus a young lady’s bottom are to be revealed in the Soaraway Sun (prop: the Dirty Digger).  The media generally has been harrumphing about ‘conduct unbecoming’, ‘HM livid’. ‘shameful behaviour’ and on and on.

 

Come off it! The partiality of the Royals, the aristocracy and the nobility and gentry for bit of rumpy-pumpy has been well-known for centuries. Good Queen Bess was anything but. She was a preying mantis. When she tired of her squeeze he was not long for this world. James I probably bowled from both ends, always banging on about ‘the monstrous regimen of women. Charles 2 had a massive stable. A friend of mine owned the only freehold house in St James, built by old Chuck for Nell Gwynn so that he would not have too far to walk. His dying words were ‘Let not poor Nelly starve’. Here is Nellie’s portrait.

 

 

 

Perhaps one of our current crop of Royal ladies could oblige.

 

Queen Anne so loved a bit of horizontal jogging that she thought it too good for the common sort of folk. Queen Vic knew full well what was worn under John Brown’s kilt. Nothing – it was all in good nick! She is alleged also to have carried out duties as Empress of India with her Indian manservant. Princess Mags was at it like a frog up a pump. She consorted with an actor-cum-gangster who was hung like a grandfather clock. His party trick was to wave it at the other guests. Hutch, the West Indian night-club singer, is said to have pleasured not just Lady Mountbatten but a swathe of royalty and nobility during his hey-day in the 30’s and 40’s.

 

And we think we are so liberated!

 

Now we have the media pontificating about sexual morals. Pass the sick bag, Mabel.

Dishonesty and Incompetence in the Greenery

I don't usually cut and paste other people's work but this piece is so good I had toshare it with you.

 

The writer is a friend of 52 years, a former newspaper editor, top financial journalist and author.

 

The US administration’s multi-billion plan to create “green” jobs – President Obama offered the rosy prospect of five million new jobs -- “has failed to produce any of the benefits initially claimed,” says energy expert Allen Brooks.

Although some of the failures are obvious, such as the bankruptcy of solar energy companies after they hoovered up massive government subsidies, others are harder to pin down because of “lack of a consistent and accurate measurement” of claimed benefits.

Conveniently, the administration has avoided releasing estimates of job creation due to “inconsistencies” in the self-reported statistics.

However we do know that a half-billion-dollar Labor Department programme to train people for 79,854 green jobs has been condemned as a “dismal failure” by its Inspector General as it created only 8,035 jobs.

A clear defect of depending on self-reporting by public authorities is that they conveniently classify as “green,” many jobs that average folk wouldn’t think to be such. For example, when independent consultants investigated the reported increase in “green” jobs in Michigan, they found the largest number of positions created was for garbage collectors. Next most numerous came water and sewage treatment workers, then office clerks.

In New York and Washington DC, 56 per cent of all jobs classified as “green” are in fact researchers, lawyers, consultants and similar who constitute the bloated bureaucratic infrastructure for promoting greenery rather than people actually doing green jobs.

According to a report in the New York Times, 19 factories in the developing world are making huge profits from “an unlikely business” – producing coolant gases said to worsen global warming, so they can earn carbon credits from destroying their waste product.

They realized that under the United Nations scheme to combat generation of greenhouse gases they could earn one carbon credit from eliminating one ton of carbon dioxide – but more than 11,000 credits for destroying a ton of an obscure waste gas normally released in the manufacture of a widely-used coolant gas, HFC-22.

Carbon credits earned can be sold on the international market for anything from $9 to nearly $40 apiece, probably earning each plant an average of $20-40 million a year. This incentive has driven plants in countries such as India and China to keep high, production of the coolant gas blamed for worsening global warming… even boost output.

The UN and the European Union have known about this unintended consequence for several years, but struggles to end it because of the vested interest of companies that have come to depend on earnings from carbon credits that they are essentially “printing.”

Some Chinese producers have warned that if they stop getting paid for such credits, they will vent waste gas into the sky – which is not illegal in China or India.

Another Sharpeville?

What are we to make of the shootings at the Lonmin mine? And what does it tell us about South Africa in these times? As far as I can recall, it is the worst single incident of this kind since Sharpeville 52 years ago.

But what sparked the shooting seems not to have been so much of an industrial dispute as inter-union rivalry. Violence and killing had been going on for some time.

The main difference was that the Sharpeville protesters were unarmed. The miners were armed to the teeth with guns, spears and pangas. They also used muti – a spell that would make them immune to bullets, or so they believed. The police fired 300 rounds in a minute. The result was 44 dead and 120 wounded.

In the 1960’s African mineworkers were the aristocrats of labour. They were well-paid in comparative terms. Johannesburg was Egoli – the city of gold. Immigrants flocked there from all over the region. The mining industry even had its own air-service, Wenela,  to take workers home at the end of their contracts and pick up the new recruits. I used to watch the passengers coming off the plane in Malawi, dressed to the nines, all carrying huge suitcases full of the luxury goods unaffordable or unobtainable at home. Many started their own businesses on the proceeds of half-a dozen contracts.

The new batch had what they stood up in and little more.

They were housed in dormitories at the mine, with good nourishment and medical facilities. .

In Zambia rising copper prices meant high pay especially when the annual copper bonus was paid out. That was a good time for car dealers but not quite so good for we road users. Housing was provided, along with medical and social facilities.

So I was taken aback to see that no such facilities appeared to be provided at Lonmin. The workers live in insanitary hovels. There did not appear to be either drainage or piped water supplies. Conditions came across as appalling.

In Zambia the Chinese-owned mines are notorious for their flouting of the most basic safety requirements, even the provision of hard hats. Miners are sent back to work immediately after blasting before the fumes and dust have cleared. There have been reports of miners being forced to work 365 days with no time off. Unions are not recognised. There are constant strikes and violence.

Wages are the lowest in the country and certainly far lower, inflation-adjusted, than they were 50 years ago.

Perhaps we old colonials weren’t so wicked after all.

Watch out: GREXIT's about!

The essence of Greek tragedy is that to a great extent the chief protagonist has been a party to his own downfall; Nemesis follows Hubris.

We are told that Monday 20^th August is crunch-time for the Greeks when they will have to step up to the plate and show that they are fully deserving of yet more German cash or get out of the Club. The more likely scenario is that we shall see more duck-shoving, muddle and mess, prevarication, indecision, and, of course, meetings! ‘Resolved to be irresolute, solid for fluidity, adamant for drift’.

But Greece is but  a symptom of a Eurozone-wide crisis. So first, the big issue.

The problem is financial and economic.

The financial part is that a number of Eurozone countries have piled up public debt that is unmanageable. There is also huge private debt. Ireland and Spain got into deep poo off the back of an insane real estate bubble. The developers were able to overbuild with cheap money which the governments were powerless to control because they could not increase the bank rate. The arbiter of the Eurozone, Germany, had a vested interest in cheap money, so others could go hang. This toxic combination means that interest payments alone are an unsustainable burden, and the prospects of repayment are gloomy to say the least. Since a huge part of this debt is owned by banks the stability of the whole banking system comes under threat.

The economic dimension is based on a fundamental fallacy. We were led to believe that monetary union would bring about an EU-wide convergence in costs and prices, although it was not clear how this would be achieved.

The reality was that in Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal and Spain costs and prices rose relative to the northern economies, leading to increasing uncompetitiveness vis a-vis the north, especially Germany, of between 20% and 40%. This in turn caused an excess of imports over exports, current account deficits, and thus an accumulation of international debt.

Is there a solution?

Salvation might lie in establishing a real exchange rate – the comparative level of costs and prices as reflected in the exchange rate between currencies.

The snag is that this is impossible in a monetary union because the central banks thereby gave up their control over rates.

So it is blindingly obvious that the solution is to quit the monetary  union.

Of course, the €fanatics would have it that this would lead to chaos and ruin throughout the world, with the collapse of the international financial system, debt defaults, bank failures and the end of civilisation as we know it!

Really? It seems to me that once national currencies are re-established with effective devaluation against the euro, economic recovery would be stimulated by an increase in exports – and therefore jobs, higher inflation would reduce the real interest rate and boost consumer and capital spending. It would also enable QE which would encourage domestic demand.

A possible scenario then would be a Eurozone of the north and perhaps a common market within the EU for the Club Med, perhaps led by France, which has a certain logic since France has some similarities to the troubled south, with a current account deficit, a decades-long budget deficit and strong links to Greece in finance and banking. The snag here is that it would entail France junking the Europe policy – containment of Germany – that was one of the justifications for the EU in the first place, and therefore very unlikely to happen.

So how would it be done?

In the first instance, it would be essential to introduce capital controls. There has already been massive ‘capital flight’ from Greece and Ireland, much of it to London, to the delight of high-end estate agents. Banks would have to close during the transition. Exchange rates would need to decline sharply so that e.g. a new Italian lira would have to devalue against the euro by about 30%.

The suits in Brussels go on about ‘contagion’ if Greece leaves. There is some prospect of this but not quite in the way they see it. If exit restores Greek fortunes, there would perhaps be an overwhelming temptation for others in Club Med to follow suit. The Eurozone would then have better prospects of survival, being  composed of countries that at least had a resemblance of a community of interest.

Who would be the winners and losers? Well, the losers would be savers at every level, as capital values fall, and people on fixed incomes i.e. pensions as the real value would be diminished by inflation. The winners would be the Greek workforce – or rather the unemployed workforce – as recovery stimulates jobs. Otherwise, Greece is well on the road to becoming a third-world country, and a very unstable one, with nationalist, protectionist and extremist political parties getting ever more support.

At the beginning of this crisis I was poo-pooed for suggesting that a main cause besides Club Med improvidence was that Germany had massive trade surpluses with Club Med, and that it should boost consumer demand to offset the imbalance. Without the euro, market forces would have placed a proper value of the DM.

Markets will get us out of this mess once they are allowed to operate properly. As the Blessed Margaret said ‘You can’t buck a market!’

Assange: asylum, bunkum and some hard facts

The amount of crap, abuse and just plain ignorance published  about the Assange extradition case is exceptional.

So here’s the facts, not, of course, that the protagonists are interested in something so mundane.

Assange’s case is that by extraditing him to Sweden he could then be extradited to the US where he could face the death penalty. This is garbage and his brief knows it. Nobody can be extradited from Europe to a country where he could face the death penalty (apart from which he can’t be charged with espionage, which does carry the death penalty for reasons that I have explained previously).

His claim for asylum is bogus. He must have a well-founded fear of persecution in his home country. As he is Australian this is clearly palpable nonsense. The International Convention on refugees says that you can’t claim asylum if there are reasons to believe that you have committed serious non-political crime outside the country of refuge.

Assange has not been accused of a crime committed in England and it is nonsense to aver that he has been under ‘house arrest’ for 2 years. He was granted bail and has been living comfortably with a friend in the Suffolk countryside.

As I predicted, he has jumped bail leaving his friends short of the £200,000 bail money. That indicates the stripe of the man.

He is therefore liable to be arrested, but not as long as he is in diplomatic territory where  he is beyond the reach of the Old Bill. One suggestion was using the SAS to extract him a la Yvonne Fletcher. In that case the Libyan Embassy had been occupied by terrorists. It can’t be done legally in the present case.

Assange’s problem is that he will get his collar felt the moment he steps outside. Of course, he could be taken to the airport in an Embassy car, but then he has to get on a plane!

It looks as if his stay with the Ecuadoreans will be a long one. Enjoy!

Banks and railways.......Virgin on the ridiculous.

Two big stories have hit the financial pages - Virgin's failure with its rail franchise bid, and the hoo-ha over Standard Chartered Bank.

First, Virgin.

I take little interest in public transport in England, not having been a user for years, but I do take an interest in cock-ups by Government, and this one appears to be a corker.

It seems to make no sense whatever. First Rail have paid £700 million more than Branson’s offer and yet have promised more services, improvements to rolling stock, catering and Lord knows what else. The figures just don’t stack up. But they are allowed to increase fares by up to 11% a year, more than 3 times the rate of inflation. The upshot would seem to be either promises that won’t be kept or the passenger pays through the nose or both.

First Rail already has 4 franchises and has not distinguished itself with any of them. It is also beginning to look a tad monopolistic. It all smells of a Government Department that is interested only in grabbing the money without a thought for the economic effect of increased rail fares. It will end in tears.

I know that Branson is self-publicist – in – chief, but he runs a good operation and understands the meaning of service. That is why Virgin Atlantic is one of the world’s best.

We will hear more, much more.

Now for Standard Chartered.

I have been devilling on this since the story first broke.

And it stinks!

Because SC has paid a fine (much less than demanded) this does not necessarily add up to an admission of guilt.

What have we got? A new, young, ambitious lawyer with political yearnings out to make his mark. His bailiwick is Wall Street. It is common knowledge that Wall Street is seriously pissed-off about being overtaken by the City. His handling of the affair shrieks ‘grandstanding’ and taking the easy and fashionable road of banker-bashing to grab the headlines.

SC was already engaged with the Fed about this. Bernanke is reported to be livid with this young man’s side-lining him and going rogue without any consultation. It is said also that the A-G is not a happy bunny. George Osborne has been yelling down the phone at the Fed. Most informed opinion here is asking ‘Wall Street stitch-up? Dirty tricks department working overtime?

It is notable that although a bank investigation usually results in immediate contrition because a bank is in a very disadvantageous position vis-à-vis the Regulator, on this occasion SC hit back extremely aggressively, and m’ learned friends are anticipating a big pay-day.

It is admitted that SC has made errors in an extremely complex situation but not necessarily wilfully. The accusations are not an offence under SC’s law of domicile and it seems apparent that the US requirements are confusing and opaque. But SC can’t risk its New York licence so it has paid its protection money.

I may have got this hopelessly wrong, but of one thing I am certain. This will run and run even if it quickly goes off the front pages.

Back to reality..

The US is still coasting on the news of Paul Ryan's selection as Mitt's running mate. Indeed, it has taken a large chunk out of Olympic coverage. Odd, but placards bearing the names of Romney and Ryan had not even been prepared when the announcement was made while the Democrats almost immediately came up with a negative advertisement against Ryan. My guess is that the Dems had prepared negative adds against all the leading contenders while Ryan's announcement was prematurely leaked.

Paul and Mitt are very much enjoying their honeymoon as they cannot say enough good about one another while incessantly patting on each other's backs. I doubt the relationship will end in tears, but the dynamics of the President/Vice President relationship have seldom favored good relations. Besides, it is too early to speculate on this relationship as this dynamic duo need to first of all win the election. That prospect continues to remain doubtful give O's standings in the polls.

The Olympic Games certainly provided a pleasant diversion from dark thoughts and speculation over the state of the world. The respite was refreshing, but gloom and doom have resurfaced. I do not like the rumblings in Israel over their felt need to wipe out Iran's nuclear capabilities. Nor do I like rumblings in the US about somehow or another aiding the rebels in Syria. I found Mohamed Morsi's move on the generals incredible. My feeling is that he only made this move with approval from the military or, if not, he will pay the consequences.

I understand that Italy's Monti is totally out of sorts with Germany's Merkel and has found a new ally in Spain's Zapatero. Misery seeks company? It is taking forever to officially and formally acknowledge that Margaret Thatcher was right after all.

'You never had it so good........!

Well, the party’s over.

‘The shouting and the tumult dies,

The captains and the kings depart….’

So that’s it. London and the rest of us can get back to normal, whatever that may be.

It must be said that the Olympiad was  a success way beyond our wildest dreams; even the weather smiled upon us (mostly). The most important result is that it has made the British feel good about themselves after low morale all round because of the economy and our awful politics etc.

Times are really bad, aren’t they?

Er……..no!

We’ve never had it so good.

We are richer, healthier and freer than we have ever been. And I mean the world, not just we Western fat-cats.

The globalisation of trade has raised mega-millions out of poverty in the last 20 years. We get cheap clothing and electronics from Asia and China. They get to eat meat for the first time (good news for American farmers who sell vast quantities of foodstuffs to China; think about that, you Tea Partiers, when you next bang on about a trade war with China for fixing their exchange-rate). They live in houses instead of huts. They have access to clean water and power. They are getting many of the things that we take for granted.

The Millennium Goal on poverty reduction (don’t hear too much about those nowadays) was met in 2008, 7 years ahead of schedule.

That proves the benefits of our huge foreign aid programmes, does it not? Don’t make me laugh. It was economics and trade, not hand-outs!

The doomsayers have been telling us for years that we are running out of energy supplies. Years ago one such predicted 1977 as the crunch year. The truth is that proven reserves of carbon fuels are huge, greater than they  have ever been.

And that we are ruining the environment and concreting-over England’s green and pleasant land. Actually we have more woodland than in 1914.

But what about ‘climate change’? Funny how ‘global warming’ got lost along the way. It’s a myth; but also a racket that pays grants to scientists for fudging the figures, subsidies to ‘clean energy’ cowboys for producing wind-power at unaffordable cost, and easements to farmers of £50,000 a year for each wind-turbine.

The reality is that a modest rise in the UK temperature would bring us back to where we were in AD1000, and help lengthen the lives of many oldies. We might even start producing wine in Yorkshire as we did in the 11^th Century.

What’s not to like?

But the economy is in a mess, surely.

It all depends on which statistics today’s spreader of alarm and despondency  is using. As has been well-said, they use statistics like a drunk uses a lamp post – for support rather than illumination.

A survey using a basket of figures shows that the three strongest economies are Germany, the US and GB in that order.

On that uplifting note, have a good week, y’all!

POTUS winner? Big corporations as ever!

I understand that UK bookmakers favor Obama in the presidential race. This is not surprising as Mitt is losing it. His biggest problem is that of being perceived as icy, out of touch and lacking in empathy. He needed a running mate that would balance this aspect of his personality; Someone like Senator Marco Rubio from Florida. Instead, he selected Congressman Paul Ryan from Wisconsin.

Paul, like Rubio, would make a better president than VP. They are both very bright, but the similarities end there. Ryan, like Romney, comes across as ice cold. His major accomplishments in the House were to make some remarkably sound budget proposals and to make mince meat out of Obamacare. These types of activity endowed Ryan with the respect of his peers, but the public could not embrace his intellectual skills. Nor is he much of an orator. Newt Gingrich, by comparison, is also very bright, but also very articulate and capable of capturing people's imaginations. On that score, Ryan is not. It is as if we have a Romney double in the race. All in all, a risky choice. Mitt surely selected someone he could work with and respected. One large factor in the Romney/Ryan ticket is religion. Mitt comes in with a liability as a Mormon. Ryan joins as an asset; a Catholic. This choice will help Mitt cement the Catholic vote with  the possible exception of Latin Catholic votes. Latinos don't like Mitt's hard stand on immigration.

Most people agree that the final determination between O and M will be made during the debates. It is also the consensus that O is the better debater. Your bookmakers are correct as are the latest polls from both sides of the political fence. They favor O by up to 9 percentage points.

It is clear that if M hopes to win the election, he will have to come up with a new persona along with a frontal attack on O's poor track record and political philosophy. This is exactly the advice given by Charles Krauthammer who is a powerful bastion of conservative thought. He specifically stated that O's stewardship as President and his ideology define the political battleground for the upcoming election. His record is poor and rife with unkept promises. His ideology is populist at best and socialist at worst. Krauthammer noted that O's statement to the effect that entrepreneurs did not build their businesses, but their workers did encapsulates his political thinking which is anti-business and anti-rich.

Given the manner in which political life is practiced in the USA today, I am not sure whether it matters who sits in the Oval Office. The power is with the big corporations who generally have their way with both the Senate and the House. Their influence is key to understanding the manner in which we govern and it is highly unlikely that their influence will be diluted by a president as far left as O.