21st Century Politics

Obama in serious trouble

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Fri, 01 Jun 2012 16:19:00 +0000

"Obama has let the Republicans put him in a box on the economy and the deficit.Their refusal to allow any further economic stimulus and Obama's failure to make that intransigence an issue have made him politically dependent on an improving economy. Their refusal to agree to a "grand bargain" on the deficit and his failure to pursue one himself have given Republicans another issue on which to base their campaign.

So what, now? Obama needs a serious Plan B, a campaign strategy that doesn't assume slow economic growth but figures out how to win with unemployment back on the rise. It may very well be impossible to win under those circumstances, but the current frame of "forward versus backward" is on the verge of obsolescence. It's time to contemplate the abyss and emerge with a message that tells the truth boldly and consistently — as the president himself sees it — about what he will do to turn the economy around and put our country's finances in order."

-- Carter Eskew, Washington Post

I think Carter sums it very well. Problem is not just today's rotten employment number, but needlessly defused campaign strategy adopted by Obama. All that Clinton bravado, seems quite misplaced at this point. With Greece exist from Euro and Spain driven economic shock, things are getting worse every passing day in Europe and it would take its own sweet time to resolve one way or the other. This means 'drag' of European Economic crisis is not going to go way till November Elections; all the more reason why Obama needs to 'level with Americans'.

With impeding Democratic Waterloo in Wisconsin in hands of Scott Walker and very likely adverse decision about ObamaCare by the Supreme Court in coming weeks; the stage is set of utter 'darkness' for Democrats. Instead of steering Democrats and America with a steely determination and leadership, we have wobbly Obama who is not sure of his own campaign, who has lost the impulse, who does not have any coherent political strategy and above all willingness to articulate consistent policy proposals which can corral Americans and for which his supporters can fight along with him.

The fundamental problem in all this is not that Obama will not get re-elected. The problem is Romney is all set to let 'loose Ryan' in Romney presidency - the policies GOP is advocating are 'worse' than what is happening now; more tax cuts for rich and reduction of help to poor (entitlement cuts are necessary but GOP way is not an intelligent way there). Voters will simply react as like 'throw the bums out' without realizing that newcomers will be taking us on a more desperate path. To believe otherwise is totally discount Romney and GOP campaign currently underway and I am not sure how smart that is.

Why blame Greeks? Even American voters are unlikely to be any wiser. We know that our President is simply politically 'incompetent' to take us through these crisis times; but our other choice does not look any promising and voters will ignore that unfortunately while throwing out Obama.

Update - Joe Nocera is hitting the nail on Obama Administration coffin in another way. Why would Romney not argue that GOP has been 'way tougher' on Crime than Obama and he will have business friendly environment without being a hostage to Capitalists? That is what, for sure, George Bush Administration achieved in the hindsight. Really Obama Administration is losing the altitude fast.

Take it for the team?

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Fri, 01 Jun 2012 04:36:00 +0000

I have not done enough of home work to know details, but is it that John Edwards is taking for the 'team' here? It is much advantageous for Obama Administration to 'loose' this case but meanwhile establish the 'bona-fide' of being non-partisan when it comes to 'rule of law'.

I am no fan of John Edwards and in my books he is a failed politician, a failed 'person' in the end; based on how he treated his spouse. But despite that, all this simply leaves the taste that the guy has taken 'all this pain' for the team....

Obama Administration - as WaPo Editorial mentions correctly; it is time to move on.

Inability to look beyond

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Mon, 28 May 2012 03:10:00 +0000

"None of this makes the Internet any less revolutionary. But it’s created a cultural revolution more than an economic one. Twitter is not the Ford Motor Company; Google is not General Electric. And except when he sells our eyeballs to advertisers for a pittance, we won’t all be working for Mark Zuckerberg someday."

-- Ross Douthat, New York Times

Part of what Douthat, Taylor Cowen, Matt Yeglesias and gang are saying is true. There is enormous component of Internet Economy, so called Web 2.0, which is much less about 'value' addition in human life materially than running after quarter Trillion Dollars Advertising market. That market can only increase in proportion to 'real / total' economy; not any faster.

Not for a reason why so many in Silicon Valley have then disdain for Facebook and many other such Web 2.0 companies. Cisco, Juniper make routers and switches and all the infrastructure on which this Internet runs (apart from host of chip companies which essentially power these equipments). Of course they have to solve real problems of 'physics' and they cannot be content on providing a simple 'timeline or friending button' on the Website. Make no mistake, no-one is down playing the algorithmic complexity of problems like Facebook or Netflix type of companies are solving. And for sure that component of these companies is real value addition to human endeavor.

Point is there are real companies in Silicon Valley which make all this Internet and Cloud make happen on your computer screens. My favorite example is VMware, essentially a division of EMC. How many of these critics like Douthat know of companies like VMware? How much of homework these folks have done to understand the 'real value addition' by such companies and what those companies do? What about the path breaking work Google is doing for 'automated driving car' and all the value it brings along with ubiquitous Web 2.0? How much of all these 'out side tech' folks know or have taken labor to understand? Even company like Yahoo - what do people know about the value of 'Hadoop' which it has given to Tech world? Same goes for many things like 'Trift Technique' and so on which were developed at Facebook.

I believe there is bit of superficiality to analysis and criticism by these folks. I wish these folks are more informative and careful in their dismissal of Web 2.0 as well as lot more appreciative about many companies which are doing rock solid work to advance our state of technological competence. Deriding Facebook as Web 2.0 company is very easy; but do not ignore so much of breathtaking work which happens behind the screen; all in the service of truly advancing human race.

Syriza's Challenge

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Tue, 22 May 2012 15:57:00 +0000

"Empty threats! There's no way they're going to kick us out. There won't be a euro zone if they do that...

No one can force us to leave the euro. Now that they have us, they're stuck with us...

If they change the laws to force us out, then there will be no euro zone. They're just barking to scare us but actually they're the ones who are scared,"

-- Greeks embrace some new myths about life with the euro, Reuters

It is all right for 'pundits' to fret about dangers of electing Syriza in the next round of Greek Elections, but reading this commentary one wonders what is wrong for Tsipras to play the gambit of tearing down EU austerity pact? He has rightly figured out that Europeans would finally come to senses in realizing 'self damage or collateral cost' in throwing out Greece from Euro. Of course it is gun point diplomacy and terrorism by another name; given the fact Greek Politicians first cooked books to enter Euro while Greek People are hardly ready for fair taxes and reforms. But why to practice 'reforms' when one can do without it? That must be the thinking of one Tsipras. The playbook was there 'crying' for someone to pick and here is one young, ambitious politician ready to embark upon that ploy. The way Politics works, how hard it is for someone to argue for 'change' to capture the power and then once in power; do the full U turn? What worst can happen, an election loss or two. But Greek politics being a life long profession; eventually you come back. Pandering to base - what is wrong? That is what politics is generally.

Appealing senses of common people, that is one way of dealing with this situation which non-Syriza Greek Parties, global pundits and rest of Euro are attempting. But at best it can be a weak strategy since there is no leverage while the political competence required to 'turn public' opinion away from short term benefits towards longer term advantages is off high order; generally absent. That means two things can or should happen:

- Syriza wins the election, tries to call the bluff of Europe; but Euro / IMF folks do not heed his demands and manage to control the damage of kicking Greece from Euro. Meanwhile Greece joins the club of Third World / Fourth World countries instantly. That deprives Syriza of credibility and it gets completely wiped out politically. Importance of this is not about Greece, but rest of European Population and Politicians get the hard message of undertaking badly needed reforms instead of being captivated to silly populism. Also in the process Euro folks convince the market that indeed they can erect the appropriate 'firewall' and can limit the damage.

- Or rest of the European Politicians articulate a 'convincing narrative' - that Greece can very well tear the austerity pact and still stay in the Euro; it is just that they will not get any more money and will have to do the 'hard default' unless reforms are done. Whatever Euro Bonds and all those pro-growth solutions Europe wants to undertake to solve current mess, all those measures will simply skip Greece. Sure, that will be ostracization or discrimination of the worst order; but then that is the price you pay. European austerity first crowd has ignored importance of 'growth' for too long whereas Greek Politicians do not have any gumption to undertake needed reforms so as to grow; then you do pay price like division of Euro Project.

Politics about Capitalism

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Tue, 22 May 2012 06:57:00 +0000

It is quite early in the game, but there is a feeling in the air that we have got a crucial moment in hardening of America's political opinions about coming November elections. First it is about the Presidential ticket, then rest of the ballot follows.

Jennifer Rubin is right to say that Obama's campaign built around 'shiny objects' is falling through. But I am not sharing her opinion that Obama's Private Equity argument is crumbling nor I share David Brook's evaluation that it is not creative for Obama to re-run the same campaign against Romney as like past elections - that Romney is beholden to Capitalism and does not care much about common people and their jobs. If at all, there is even more acute need 'now' to argue for the case against Capitalism as it has been practiced in last two decades.

Obama is right in this case to 'double down'. People can argue lot how much good has come out of Private Equity. But sitting in Silicon Valley, we know the difference between good 'private equity' of Kleiner Perkins, Sequoia, NEA, Lighspeed and may other Technology Venture Capitalists and 'ravenous scavenger type' equity of Bain Capital. All these Conservatives are on different planet to sing paeans about Bain Capital style private equity just after a blowout at JP Morgon and failure of Market Capitalism in 'pricing Facebook properly'. I would say Obama's instincts to fight this battle are right. My fear is two fold:

- he will quit this battle in between and

- will ignore to articulate effectively the other side of the coin: a) respectful plan / principles to contain deficits and b) a plan to grow American Economy with higher employment.

Obama is short on credibility when it comes to specifying concrete solutions. He is enduring insults from Senate Minority Leader in this regard. And generally loosing precious time in coming clean with Americans about how he would contain the 'entitlement costs'. Clearly none of that Romey is doing and he will for sure sink further our Economy by doubling down on tax cuts for rich. But Conservatives will all overlook these shortcomings of Romney, especially when it comes to slamming Obama; as that is such a fulfilling sport!

Mourning Pakistan

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Thu, 17 May 2012 05:06:00 +0000

"Pakistan is losing the best chance in its history to gain political control over all of its territory — including the warlike tribal areas along the frontier."

-- David Ignatius, Washington Post

David is too much of a good man to see the 'possibility of good' in the first place in the middle of this 'condemned to hell' situation of South Asia. Coming from South Asia (India), I never expected Pakistani rulers to be so enlightened in the first place. Well, it is not just Pakistan; India is no different - all our leaders are essentially there to 'sale our nations'.

I guess General Kayani must be thinking that - yes Tribal warriors are snakes which he is freeing them right now; but in the end he will be able to 'kill these snakes'. That is the confidence these leaders from South Asia have.

But then being 'over confident' and trying to hide all sorts of misdeeds - that is nothing new to South Asian Politicians. Just look at Imran Khan - Pakistan's next Prime Minister who effected death of innocent Pakistanis just because some American soldier flushed Koran in an Afghan toilet. Narendra Modi in Gujarath can probably serve the role model for Imran.

Some things just don't change, especially in South Asia.

Possible Opening?

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Tue, 15 May 2012 06:26:00 +0000

President Obama is right to claim that JP Morgan loss indicates the need to be vigilant about Wall Street. Loss of face for Jamie Daimon - it cannot get any better politically for President Obama considering how much 'noise' JPM CEO has been making against Frank-Dodd law all along.

If situation in Europe gets worse - and there are very high chances of that - President Obama can also go to American Electorate arguing for a 'safer and tested hand' during economic turmoil. He needs to base his argument for a calm and stable handling during recessionary times and Americans can find that as much more comforting than changing 'a horse midstream'. Another corollary of weaker European Economies is 'contained oil prices' which are already visible. Besides, it can even give an opportunity for America and Isreal to embark upon Iranian adventure as there will be room for Oil Prices to climb without paying a political price.

So, it all depends on how smartly President Obama plays his given hand. All that he has to do is 'go away from social issues' for a while rather than simply keep regurgitating.

Weakness of Obama's Reelection Case

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Mon, 07 May 2012 01:01:00 +0000

So the President is back on the campaign trail making a case that he helped to downsize or end foreign military engagements and the savings from which he wants to use in parts to reduce debt and in parts for development back home. He is also out with Julia. The first case is at least reasonable, whereas I find the whole Julia thing very repulsive and I suspect most Americans would find it so too. May be Obamas are visualizing future lives of their daughters there if he had not been to White House. Whatever is, I sense that this 'Julia' tack is simply a wrong way for America. Where is there 'morning in America'?

But campaigns are multitudes of arguments and the President will make many such arguments in months to come; (now that collectively American Politicians have stopped any governance). Here is one such appraisal of Obama's basic case for reelection.

By and large Americans would find Obama's foreign policy handling reasonable and on better side. Essentially he kept the word - ending of Iraq war despite warmongers like Sen. McCain making lot of noise. In Afghanistan, though Americans would wish to end that campaign too; they would understand Obama's reasoning in continuing that engagement at some level. Regardless of flouting of International Laws and accepted conventions, in general Americans would be supporting of 'all those drone attacks' and of course love the way Obama finished OBL. That is all fine. Obama's general support to Arab Spring and effective handling of Libya situation (without additional commitments); all that is good in eyes of average Americans. Iran is still work in progress, but so far Obama's support to Israel by America will be perceived at an acceptable level; regardless of hyperventilation by GOP on that matter. Americans find continued engagement of Obama Administration with China 'OK'. Overall Americans should find it satisfactory the simple, cool down demonear of Obama Administration with rest of the world; especially when compared to 'sword flashing cowboy diplomacy' of the predecessor.

It is the domestic policy where the water is muddy. Handling of recession and banking mess will be considered as a net positive for Obama. However it is possible that 'navigation of economy during 2008 recession' will be an undersold accomplishment for various reasons. Auto industry bailout - that would raise eyebrows for Americans; but everything which ends well will be considered well. It is the stimulus and over selling of that in terms predicting reduced unemployment rate; that will continue to weigh on Obama's political record. It is a surprise that Obama does not argue forcefully that of the total stimulus amount one third was the tax cut for middle and lower income folks, one third was direct help to States and only the remaining was spend as stimulus. Obama could argue that as indeed inadequate government support in recessionary times.

Lack of strong convictions, absence of solid commitments and visible efforts thereof to contain debt while increasing short term spending; that is where perceptions about Obama go most negative among Americans. People understand that GOP is one pony trick only - tax cuts for rich to trigger some hypothetical growth while ruthlessly cutting everything on which weaker sections of society depend. Further American People do know that GOP has been equally irresponsible when it comes to debt curtailment. But that does not mean American People are ready to accept a President who does not have a firm debt reduction plan and commitments. Simply stated, President Obama is lacking here and there are no signs that he would propose any credibly policies in this regard during the campaign season. That is shame. It is because, Obama Campaign seems to have fully double downed on 'arousal of base' as the electoral strategy rather than articulating a persuasive, decisive policy argument. (No wonder Obama critic Jennifer Rubin's criticism holds here.) In other words, Obama is simply playing defensive with a complete lack of well articulated 'political agenda' to take our problems head on.

Finally, it is the Affordable Health Care law where Obama is going to have the hardest time convincing Americans. The core argument against Obama here is - he simply overstepped 'conservative limits' in proposing the mandate. The mandate may or may not be legal; but the point is why did he and Democrats resort to such a legally risky policy? Another time, another place; such a policy might have worked. But Obama and Democrats allowed definition of American Center constructed by Tea Party. When neither you are careful in avoiding legislation which may not get public support, nor you are vigilant in defending those policies; the resultant political vacuum is an ideal setting for your opposition to manifest in a new avatar. That is what Tea Party means. Given all this, one wonders why did Democrats not come up with less risky mechanics than the mandate? In the name of 'controlling health care costs'; essentially Government landed underwriting more entitlements. Yes Americans understand that unless health care 'reach' is increased; the cost does not come down. But what is less convincing to Americans is how all this increase in coverage is going to reduce the overall cost exactly when any serious implementation of ObamaCare starts in future. Obama Administration needed to be much more prudent, scrupulous and convincing in this regard. Meanwhile the whole 'process of sausage making' (passing the bill in Congress) has left a bad taste with Americans. The contradiction of Obama 2008 Campaign claiming to 'cleanse Washington' but adopting essentially the same corrupt practices; is too glaring for Americans to ignore or digest. The fundamental thing to watch in the reelection campaign is whether Obama can douse these doubts in minds of Americans - that he may resort to corrupt process to pass 'nanny state' laws. So far Julia's of Obama Campaign hardly help to douse those doubts.

(Lightly edited and corrected the title on Monday, May 07, 2012.)

Washed out leadership?

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Sat, 28 Apr 2012 07:20:00 +0000

"Together, these three trends – a loss of economic and physical autonomy, the diffusion of information technology, and slower growth against a backdrop of larger and older populations – will create enormous political challenges in virtually every country. Demands are mounting at the same time as the ability of governments to satisfy them is diminishing. The leaders who will take power after this year’s transitions will confront this fundamental reality.

Leaders will also have to confront the byproducts of increased nationalism, populism, and, in some cases, extremism. Hostility to immigration and economic protectionism, already visible, can be projected to increase.

These developments within countries will make more difficult the challenge of generating global consensus on how to meet threats beyond borders: as governing successfully at home becomes more difficult, so will governing abroad. For citizens and leaders alike, tough times lie ahead."

-- Richard Haass

Question is - are there any leaders who are frank enough to share these constraints on national leadership with their own people. We know answers and sadly but predictably those are negative. If one listens to Hollende and other French Politicians, we know they are all busy in setting up French People for the 'downfall'. If you listen to Romney, he is promising 'moon' - tax cuts while still not cutting government expenses but rather to increase those.

May be Obama has not been so openly lying with Americans yet, but he is not exemplifying himself by talking straight with Americans too. Any American President who refuses to put forward a credible deficit reducing plan is simply not so serious. Agreed, President Obama might have done good enough job to put we Americans on a recovery path; howsoever lukewarm that recovery is. But once that is set in motion, people would be more and more interested in 'protecting these gains'; which means expecting Government to 'manage the deficit'. So far it seems that President Obama is 'loosing on this lesson' and is not showing dexterity enough to tackle these expectations of Americans.

Does it mean we are staring at generation of Politicians who are simply skipping telling truth to their own people? Unfortunately, that seems to be the case.

European Austerity - Will the Tide Turn now?

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 09:06:00 +0000

With UK in double dip and a Socialist still on track to unseat a sitting Conservative President in France; no wonder Merkel is on defense. Just may be, finally common Europeans are 'seeing through' the non-sense of one sided austerity while ignoring growth inputs.

To be sure, Europe still needs to loosen up stringent labor laws. But above all, what it needs is not lurching to extreme - as like in UK where Cameroon Government gave tax breaks to rich during recession while Hollande is waging a jihad against rich with draconian 75% taxes. Monetary easing, partial resource transfer from few remaining rich Europeans (like Germany & Dutch) to rest of European Economies in recession, targeted public spending and simultaneous loosening of rules and regulations; all that is needed to bring growth back.

It is European Politicians who are missing to strike the balance and apply specific remedies needed in each national economy. They are simply not truthful and honest about what is needed to do, no different than our politicians back home.

Defense Spending

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Sat, 21 Apr 2012 06:53:00 +0000

"But it is hard to square Dempsey's description of a world with sharply lower barriers to military power with his defense of the administration's strategic guidance and budget."

-- Rebert Haddick, Foreign Policy

GOP has been attempting to clobber Obama and Democrats on this one - decrease in Defense Spending as per the last Debt Ceiling Accord. Paul Ryan does not believe Dempsey. GOP simply believes that the first and only job of Government is to fight a war (to protect assets of rich). Fortunately, American Public is with Democrats in reducing military commitments and GOP is unlikely to get any traction on increasing defense spending.

USA and Latin America

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Mon, 16 Apr 2012 00:38:00 +0000

"I'm not sure the next summit will even be possible,"

-- Carlos Gaviria, a Colombian politician and former presidential candidate.

That is how far USA has fallen from grace in Latin America. What the prostitution scandal shows is given an opportunity Americans - common Americans - would find it hard to resist exploitation of flesh, drugs and market of Latin America. Add to it, isolation of President Obama in legalizing drugs. It is easy to understand in an election year President Obama cannot simply back legalization of drugs which basically shifts the burden of drug war from producers to consumers i.e. those Americans who are addicts and the American System which sustains this consumption.

It is possible that in his second term Obama would back admission of Cuba in OAS. But in an election year - that is hard and hence complete isolation of USA & Canada on that. Traditionally conservative and pro-USA Chile might come along USA in this regard; but by and large most countries in Americas want Cuba to be in. And reality is more 'good is likely' to come by Cuba joining OAS rather than being a pawn of China. But Conservatives in USA are unlikely to understand any of this. Practically they would go for division of Americas between a group of USA, Canada, Columbia (though even it backed Cuba admission) & Chile (where the conservative president is loosing the altitude fast) and rest of the countries in another group led by behemoth Brazil. Ironically, Paul Ryans of GOP would strike a chord with Brazilian President when she complains about Bernanke Fed monetary easing. Except that, countries of Americas are likely to find that Romney Administration will be not be any easy to deal with. All that means is the way American Politics is structured today, America is simply incapable of stopping its waning influence in Americas.

Ignorance

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Tue, 10 Apr 2012 05:22:00 +0000

David Brooks did a reasonable job in describing Economy I and II. But when he started to draw political constituencies based on that he forgot a simple fact that the most important part of Economy I (export oriented American Industry) is High Tech Industry and all that is deep blue. Silicon Valley is predominantly Democratic, same so with Austin in Texas or Raleigh in North Carolina. That is the peril of 'being a cheap ideologue' trying to twist facts to prove some nonsensical political theorem. So grossly wrong.

Truth is political leanings are mixed over both Economy I and II. Raw Politics, lust of power for the sake of power, trumps lot of time underlying economic realities. With heightened polity like America where elections are like clockwork, deep rooted political division almost seems inevitable. Leadership in this era is:

- not to allow this divisiveness go beyond a limit and

- from time to time achieve agreement over a specific topic to make some critical advances in lives of Americans.

Obama may be bit ok on the first part, but still drawing blank on the second whereas Romney and GOP are nowhere near on both accounts. They are still stuck on 'trash'.

Jobs of Cars

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Fri, 06 Apr 2012 14:33:00 +0000

“Design must be functional and functionality must be translated into visual aesthetics, without any reliance on gimmicks that have to be explained,” he said.

-- Ferdinand A. Porsche

Sounds like Steve Jobs of Automobile Era.

Obamacare

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Sat, 31 Mar 2012 01:57:00 +0000

My bet - Supreme Court decides 'mandate' unconstitutional by 5-4 margin; but holds rest of the law by 5-4 margin asking Congress to fix remaining part. (Justice Kennedy voting for majority in the first one whereas Chief Justice Roberts voting for keeping the law in the second decision while Justice Kennedy siding with other conservative justices.) It is very simple for Court to say, if without 'mandate' Congress thinks the law is broken then either it fixes or simply nullifies. Why should it be the job of Supreme Court to go after remaining law which is constitutional? At least that is what I believe is a cleaner verdict for this court to deliver without being an 'activist court' while still guarding limits on Congress.

As Washington Post remarked, indeed President Obama turned out to be 'reckless' in banking so much on the 'mandate'. Experts had mentioned many alternatives to 'mandate' which would have achieved the same result (bringing Insurance companies on board for the expanded coverage) while taking no legal risk. Obama Administration simply turned out to be careless in this regard. You do not 'risk' such a monumental, herculean, generations wide political task for one a single item. The genesis of all that is in the way Obama left Congress to run the show about the health care law. They learnt the lessons of Clinton Administration Health initiative failure too extremely and allowed recalcitrant Democratic Congress to run afoul. Obama and Democrats, all are paying the price now.

As the sun set today on Potomac, Supreme Court would have sealed the verdict and if my bets are right; we could be in for politics as usual. No doubt Tea Party would get flip and the fundamental case against Obama will be proved right - he is bringing the 'nanny state' which is trampling our liberties. Fear of more such draconian measures in his second term would the best ammunition for the Romney Campaign (though his MA health care law will be still an albatross); assuming he clinches the nomination by June. On the other hand, Obama and Left will continue to paint Supreme Court in cohort with Conservatives with back to back results like United Citizens and Affordable Health Care Law. On top of that, while GOP will gun for gutting the law completely Obama will argue for 'fixing the broken part' as the rationale for the second term. In other words, though the needle would have moved in the direction of Tea Party without any doubt; it will be politics as usual in the end. No leadership, all lies while our problems continue to stay as they are.

Winds Blowing

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Mon, 26 Mar 2012 15:58:00 +0000

As dust settles after the decisive UP and Panjub state elections in India, few things are becoming clear:

- Days of UPA are indeed numbered. Congress planned all along to pass the baton from Dr. Singh to Rahul Gandhi during Dr. Singh's seconds term; but seems like Rahul is coming as a 'dud' in electoral politics. With disastrous electoral performance in UP and emergence of many other non-Congress leaders like Akhilesh Yadav of SP to claim mantle of young voters; things are looking indeed dim for Congress Party led by Rahul Gandhi. Either he improves or Congress will have to start the transition to a new leadership using old hands like Pranab Mukherjee as intermediate steps.

- It is not that the charisma of Gandhi-Nehru family is totally gone. One single bad term by non-Congress parties and Gandhi-Nehru family led Congress comes back roaring. That is the history of modern India. But the question is will the non-Congress parties be so incompetent to repeat mistakes of Janata Party in post-emergency times or Janata Dal of VPSingh? With the rise of Narendra Modi, Nitish Kumar and now possibly Akhilesh Yadav; may be, just may be; Indian non-Congress Parties have learned sufficient lessons of being in power. Of course, NDA proved earlier that non-Congress coalition can complete a term. So definitely Indian Polity is mature all across not to repeat past mistakes.

- All this means fundamentally it is the naive politics by Dr. Singh and then by Rahul Gandhi; that is what is at the root of Congress Party problems. No sane Prime Minister of India would have allowed appointment of a known 'corrupt hand' Suresh Kalmadi to head Commonwealth Games and invite the infamy thereof. While Dr. Singh showed singular ineptitude for Politics in his second terms and A. Raja driven Telecom corruption scandal erupted, Rahul Gandhi did not distinguish himself by the way he handled Anna Hazare. It seemed like Mommy Sonia was not in Delhi and the boy lost the plot. There was a golden chance for Rahul Gandhi to 'leaf frog' the anti-corruption campaign and to rally Indian Youth against corruption on the backdrop of Arab Spring, all led of young people. That would have simply swamped Anna Hazare. But instead, he allowed the narrative to be driven by Team Anna and landed giving a singular speech on the topic in Loksbha, but nothing more. Meanwhile foreign commentators (for example Bill Keller from NYT) eulogized Hazare. No wonder, Indian votes started to run away from Congress and experienced politicians like Sharad Pawar are signaling where the winds are blowing.

Where would all this go? I guess continued disarray in BJP can give Congress and UPA some reprieve. But unless economy improves, Congress and UPA are unlikely to benefit from weaker opposition. Inflation, lack of growth and lack of structural reforms; all of that is going to make economic improvement harder to achieve. Stronger regional parties would also not give enough room for Congress to achieve any policy coherence. All that means, continuation of 'muddle through' - Congress hoping for recuperative period while Opposition possibly exploring new political alignments.

Islamic veil

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Thu, 22 Mar 2012 06:09:00 +0000

"Mr. Merah reportedly told the police besieging him that his killings were meant as revenge for the ban on the public use of the Islamic veil, which was supported by Mr. Sarkozy."

-- Editorial, Washington Post

If this has any truth, Mr. Sarkozy should bet all of his re-election on doubling down this ban on Islamic veil in public spaces. France is one of the rarest countries which has dared to take on fanatic Islamist to preserve the shred of secularism in the age of 'misguided political correctness'. After all, France can claim the bragging rights for Secularism in Politics with all its turbulent and revolutionary past. Just look at the neighbor UK and many other countries in Europe (and of course India); which simply cannot bring the strength to take on religious extremists. With Santorum in GOP Primary, USA does not distinguish itself as well when it comes to secular polity. Given this global contest, France will do well to get tough on any type of Islamic extremism and non-sense their off. Here is an opportunity for Mr. Sarkozy to cover himself over the 'inane Hollande'. France can perfectly deal with religious extremism while still being a reasonable place for immigrants of all religion.

Debt Ceiling Drama

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Mon, 19 Mar 2012 15:45:00 +0000

For sure, that is the impression Washington Post story gave - that White House was almost about to agree with the Speaker, but then drew cold feet. Basically, Obama Administration became reluctant to walk with the Speaker because the Gang of Six proposal came out public with a substantial support in Senate, including few Republicans. White House realized that it was on 'limb' as far revenue increase goes; it was agreeing 'way too much' to Tea Party.

Core mistakes by Administration here were:

- First of all leaving their original position of reasonable tax increase as a part of the final deal. Such 'deviation on policy' ground was really wrong. I suspect it would have been Daley and Geithneir behind such follies while President himself did not realizing what was he bringing on the block for 'sale'.

- Next, how come Obama Administration was so blind sided that it would not understand what the Gang of Six was up to? After all it simply did not learn any lessons from ObamaCare drama - that White House needs to be plugged in with the Congress and it should not leave it to the Congress to drive such important matters. In short, where has been the leadership?

If the story in Washington Post is true (that is a big 'if' since Ezra Klein was giving slightly different flavor of this 'inside base ball' for a while); this whole thing is really 'bad' for Obama Politically. It simply shows Obama Administration out of its depth when it comes to dealing with serious matters of Debt Management. It has very poor sense of timing as well as adopts very poor tactics of negotiations. It was foolish to 'concede on the policy of serious revenue increase'. One understands that when it comes to negotiations and political compromises, everything is on the table. But that does not mean 'you sale your house'. There must be some core principles which must be non-negotiable, no matter what is at stake. Slipping on that as well as not having a 'judgement where the Senate is heading'; both appear political blunders of highest proportion.

Valley Catching the Fire?

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Sun, 18 Mar 2012 07:22:00 +0000

When Kleiner Perkins is confident enough to start a new fund, you are talking some serious traction in the economy. With Bonds getting hammered over last few weeks, it is clear that Bernanke may not be able to keep his word that till 2014 he will not raise interest rates. It is not just Oil which fueling inflation for energy products; but overall the potent force of labor driven inflation in the economy. Still it is too early and there is tremendous 'slack' in the Labor Market; but you never know how the voracious demand in countries like China and India would append the global economy. So fat so good and as the premium VC in Silicon Valley shows; things are going as per the script for the recovery under way. But unless checked, 'over heating' may not be that far.

Hard to Prove Einstein Wrong

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Sat, 17 Mar 2012 08:29:00 +0000

Decades after decades that is what brightest minds of humanity have found - it is simply hard to prove Mr. Einstein wrong. There seems to be no exception this time - Opera Team observations claiming existence of particles travelling faster than Light, those were simply not substantiated by another equally reputed team called Icarus Team.

Well, that is where today's Science is - brutality of physical experiments is all that matter. That is same as Science centuries ago. So we accept what in the end experiments tell us. Cheers to Science and that is how it must be - primacy of observations and no place for sensationalism; no matter how much we all may find it entertaining.

Future of UK

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Thu, 15 Mar 2012 07:08:00 +0000

While UK PM is enjoying his Washington DC and USA visit, one question which keeps coming to my mind is what possibility is there that UK remains a united nation of Wales, England, Scotland and part of Ireland? What is fashionable is to 'gloss over' the challenge posed by Leftist Scottish National Party (SNP) which is rooting for a separate nation from UK. SNP challenge is precisely dangerous because as far as whatever limited governance allowed to Scottish Parliament and Government, SNP has delivered on that. It is one of the rare political organizations which delivers when in power. That can be dangerous to London if UK Government expects to retain the control with old style machinations.

I for one thing think that UK in it's current format is past it's life and contradictions in political structure as set in past are catching up and setting up itself for a dim a future. Regardless of uplifting visiting to Washington DC by UK PM, or yet again renaissance of British Music (as aptly celebrated by Mumford and Sons at White House) or the coming extravaganza of Olympics in Summer 2012; none of that mask various longer term challenges faced by this country. To start with you have economic difficulties, compounded by austerity zeal of a conservative government. Then the same conservative government has essentially cut all ropes with EU (not that EU in itself is exemplifying). On top of that then this Scottish challenge. If SNP successfully breaks out Scotland from UK, starting with how can UK retain its UNSC seat to what meaningful Economic weight it can carry on the global state; all those issues crop up.

David Cameron is not Thatcher (who of course in a way sowed the contemporary seeds of Scottish Nationalism by rubbing Scott dominated Labor unions in wrong ways during her reign); but he or any other UK Politician to be a visionary; he or she would need to take advantage of the Scottish challenge and would need to bring 'whole sale' changes in UK Political apparatus. For starter, get rid of Queen as the head of state (let the House of Windsor be Chief in Tourism of UK), abolish nonsensical House of Lords and reduce the number of seats of House of Commons. Bring Federalism with a compact council to replace House of Lords along lines of American Senate; say 2 or 4 members from each of these 4 constituting countries with additional representation for overseas establishments. While you are there, why not go for a formal written Constitution? The idea is transform UK into a fully newly minted country where nationalism of Scott or Welsh find an exciting home with no need for any divisive sentiments. Let UK be that enthralling and visionary experiment in Federalism of 21st Century with equal sustenance of what is good in it's past. If these things are not going come, there will not be only books published who mourn death of UK; but that will be the reality then.

Defending GOP

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Mon, 12 Mar 2012 02:14:00 +0000

I understand the urge of Ross Douthat to defend GOP primary voters given the roaster of second rate GOP Presidential Primary candidates. And there is merit in what Ross is arguing about.

But the fact of the matter is GOP voters have at crucial juncture shunned reasoned voices. No amount of justification can wash away South Carolina victory of the 'garbage can' I mean Gingrich. Bulk of GOP voters have allowed the whole debate to be dominated by crass social issues and insane economic and foreign policy prescriptions.

It is true that the larger share of blame goes to those 7 GOP leaders Ross mentioned - Huckabee, Daniels, Jeb Bush, Christi, Paul Ryan, Jindal and Marco Rubio; all those who ducked 2012 primary. The reason I say this is does anyone recall any of these leaders chastisizing 'policy nonsese' propagated by these presidential nominees? Who of GOP leaders and party leaders have said that:

- tax cuts in all cases would not take us out of deficit,

- GOP cannot advocate extreme anti-immigration policy; and

- just notching one up in anti-Iran sabre rattling is no policy in the end.

Except for some gingering protests and noise by Jeb Bush and Bobby Jindal about immigration, none of these leaders have even attempted to correct the course of GOP; the extremist course charted by jokers of primary and by many other GOP Politicians.

In the end defending successfully GOP Primary voters hardly add any value. May be mainstream media and generic Public could be blaming 'GOP primary voters' unfairly. But that is all besides the point - what most Americans are lamenting is inability of GOP to 'connect to people' and to debate policies which can make their day to day life better without being ideological all the time. GOP is simply not functioning as a political party - conveyor belt for people's aspirations to power centers. Needless to say, loss of GOP and this dysfunction in a two party democracy creates a void and spares Democrats easy. None of that is good for Americans in the end. One political engine of ours is not working and not showing any signs of coming to a life - that is enough to worry about rather than bothering subtlety of whether it is leaders or voters.

Goldberg Bolts

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Thu, 08 Mar 2012 07:18:00 +0000

"...No amount of missiles falling on Tel Aviv, rising oil prices and economic crises matter when compared to genocide.

There are only two possible interpretations of Netanyahu’s words and deeds: Either he is the world’s greatest bluffer, or he has set himself on a course to prevent a second Holocaust. Obama has marshaled some very strong arguments against precipitous action against Iran. But I hope he understands that, with Netanyahu, the Megillah was the message."

-- Jeffrey Goldberg, Bloomberg

I do not buy a possibility of PM Netanyahu being a bluffer. World has not descended to such an amoral level where we have to contemplate an elected Prime Minister of Israel bluffing rest of the world, including America.

All this means that the likelihood of President Obama having a failure on cards in restraining Israel from attacking Iran is not a distinct possibility. If Mr. Goldberg is right and America fails in restraining Israel from her 'go alone' attack on Iran, this blogger fails to see how Mr. Obama will be elected for the second term.

Jewish Overdose

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Mon, 05 Mar 2012 07:59:00 +0000

That is what the early part of the coming week will be - over indulgence in Jewish Israeli Politics by American Politicians.

Republicans hardly know any restraints on any matter these days. Just like each Republican nominee and politician want to outwit the other guy when it comes to Tax Cuts, same is the case in advocating a belligerent tone towards Iran. Fealty towards Israel and pandering for Jewish votes, all are reaching new heights in these days of Obama haters.

There is nothing to undermine the security concerns of Israeli as Iran continues to pursue the nuclear program. The danger of Iranian nukes, if not directly but mainly through proxy players like Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas; is real and at the same it will for sure make the whole of Middle East a dangerous place as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey all these countries try to contemplate their reciprocal responses. So President Obama is right to assert that Iranian nukes is a global threat which needs a serious response. But to become bellicose early on means to undermine any possibility of diplomacy creating appropriate grounds; especially when he has categorically made it clear that:

- he effectively guarantees security of Israel and

- he does not believe in living with Iranian nukes unlike Indian and Pakistani.

But at the same time, he is warning again and again that this is not a 'video game' and loose talk is no good here.

It must be irritating for President Obama to see his domestic political opponents using this national security issue as a domestic football. Israeli PM and its political class do not show much of maturity either when they are garnering such a 'cheap and in the end not well thought through' publicity from GOP side. Today it is profitably in short term for these Israeli Politicians that Conservative American Politicians are pursuing the reckless course of attack on Iran without any thought. But if Israel gets emboldened by that and undertakes the attack on Iran and if the whole situation blows away; American Public may not remain so supportive of Israel considering possible ramifications.

To start with, Israeli Air Force is unlikely to be in a position to carry out one shot air raids and will need to undertake possibly multi-days campaign. That would give Iran an opportunity to respond while Iraq raising the hell for violation of its air space. Oil prices will go up dramatically and Russia with newly elected Putin would see this as opportunity to 'milk the world' for higher oil revenue. China may not come American ways in UN and for sure would start blaming USA in failing to control Israel as the world faces another recession. Meanwhile, if American military involvement becomes necessary and body bags start to come home while American debt continues for yet another war; American Public is bound to have not so benevolent opinion about Israel. The World and American Public Opinion can change on a dime; giving yet another lease of life to Iranian Mullahs. What looked like a lucrative free ride offered by American Conservative Warmongers, it would turn into a longer term liability for Israel if its closet allay turns away. That is why it is important for Netanyahu to trade carefully here and not to push President Obama over the cliff.

Reading the now famous President Obama interview to Goldberg of Atlantic; it is reassuring that President is trying to thread the needle here and quite possibly he is getting the 'balance right' here. Fundamentally, he has learnt the right lessons from Bush Iraq blunder:

- need to get world opinion on your side when America indeed enters a war where she is not directly attacked; and

- never to assume limitless capacity of American Public to shoulder yet another war.

President Obama is overall very 'alert' and sharp in understanding the whole situation. My favorite point in this regard is how a sitting head of the state showed an absolutely acute understanding of the situation and bowled over one of the smartest minds on the subject, that of Mr. Goldberg:

- when Goldberg asked what room Iranians have to back down publicly from their nuke posture without showing as if they are bowing to American Pressures? President responded by quoting recent speeches of Mullahs. Goldberg 'slipped the track' and naviely asked whether President believed sincerity of Mullahs. On that President 'thundered' that it is besides the point whether he believes Mullahs or not as we are on the topic whether Iranians have the 'necessary room' to turn around or not; without showing as if they are folding their tent due to American pressure.

What all that reveals is a sharp mind at work. May be I am overly impressed by President Obama here, but I think this politician / head of the state is 'getting it right' and basically resisting these war drums just to score some politics. Of course, he is aware that bombing Iran will help him carry Florida and the entire Jewish vote in America. And who knows, in the end he may land up doing all that. But before that making every effort to get the world opinion on America's side and avoiding this to become simply an Israeli issue; that is important.

Integirty

noreply@blogger.com (Umesh Patil) — Sun, 04 Mar 2012 04:55:00 +0000

It is no good when Ian Chappell calls your integrity in question. But no doubt, he is right here.

Rest of the Indian Team and Sachin Tendulkar are two different things. No matter how shameless Indian Test Cricket Team is, we do not expect Sachin to ever loose his integrity. We do not want our Cricketing Gods to fault; we do not want Sachin to blame others. And if he is not able to avoid that, it is letting down fans of Indian Cricket and Cricket Game in a monumental way. So sad.