Comments for Binary Choice

Comment on Afghanistan: Malia & Sasha’s New Adopted Sibling by politicaljar

politicaljar — Mon, 07 Dec 2009 23:44:48 +0000

1.Despite the importance and relevance to the public, especially in the middle of a crisis, financial arguements for pulling out are somewhat incoherent with America’s national interest. You know well, that the stabilization in Afghanistan is a key element of regional agenda there. Spending is enormous, maybe not well allocated so far, but definitely necessary to help make the region more secure.

2. We should avoid any sort of ‘moral’ standards in assessing the current support for the Afghan government as of now(it’s too early), or any behavior in US foreign policy for that matter. Similarly, we could raise a question that will morally dispute US engagement with China. In case of China and Afghanistan such arguements are counterproductive. Yes, Karzai’s political legitimacy can be disputed, but it is too late for any criticism, because Karzai is already sworn in, and his election recognized – the Obama administration as of now cannot do anything but try to reach an accomodation with fait accompli, which is a corrupt, and weak Karzai government.

3. I strongly disagree with your views on NATO’s presence. It is well known since Karl von Clausewitz and beyond, that war is a continuation, or an extension of policy by other means. Therefore, ALL wars are political, ergo NATO’s “war” as well. Political reasons are clear: through success in stabilizing Afghanistan retaining raison d’etre in a new global environment, if not at all preserving its very own existence. Thus, NATO’s political motivations are rather coherent with overall success in Afghanistan.

Comment on The European Question by politicaljar

politicaljar — Sun, 30 Nov 2008 20:27:28 +0000

Making your postulates a practical reality requires profound restructuring of the EU, both on technical and mental grounds. I support federal approach to Europe’s political architecture, though it is not evident that 2-speed solution will be eagerly adopted by the primary participants of the Union. The EU’s contemporary state stems from failed attempts to forge a political unity in the past – economic integration in minds of its creators was bound to be the stimulus for further integration in political terms – unity was going to ’spill-over’ from economic spheres into political. This did not occur – and divisions in today’s Europe are the proof that the economy has a limited impact on political interests. Similarily, it is not obvious that an ‘upper body’ of integration will spill oover the others. The key issue at hand today is an enormous amount of various interests of the states that in many situations are in conflict with each other – EU’s policy towards Russia being a principal example. Establishing a 2-speed Europe in my view will not provide legitimacy – if one body is to be integrated further, who and how would express EU’s position in foreign affairs? Does further integration justify a ‘higher’ body to have a decisive voice on these issues over the states, which do not participate? How to accomplish a better state of affairs when combining unity with exclusion? I do not however think that a 2-speed Europe will not improve current situation, though I think that the costs of this measure may overrun the benefits – dividing further tomorrow, a divided Europe of today will be a test for its very existence – which will be hard to pass.

Comment on The Making of History by Patrick

Patrick — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:32:04 +0000

Sorry this is what I hate. First you make the projection that Obama would lose because of racism and then you think racism is alive and well after Obama won.

I’m sorry, but we live in a country where a black man won the highest office in the country in a fair fight.

If racism is still one of the biggest problems facing America today its because we give special preference to people because of their race in law, in hiring practices, and school admissions.

Time to end the hypocrisy.

Comment on Acid, Humor & Endorsement by Piotr Woyke

Piotr Woyke — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 18:09:28 +0000

Looking on Powell’s affair from Poland, I think that it may have some positive impact on Obama’s march for victory. The most important from a few reasons is the fact, that C.Powell was seriously considered as potential McCain’s running mate. Today all rational thinking people know, that he would be better choice than Palin, despite his membership in Bush team. We should remember, that Powell is symbol of days, when present president was rather popular. He is also one of the Republican’s stars and the most respected politicians. His endorsement can’t be ignored.

If I made some serious mistakes in this short comment, please, be forgiving;)

Comment on Acid, Humor & Endorsement by politicaljar

politicaljar — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 21:02:48 +0000

I do agree on your ACORN/Ayers points, they are absolutely irrelevant to the campaign and to Obama’s would-be presidency. It’s just a minor controversy being over-discussed by desperate McCain campaign. I think McCain’s performance was remarkably better during the last debate – he seemed more assertive and did push Obama to defensive for quite long. I think though, that for a major change in the polls it was too late.
Now, there will be a huge field for the journalists and bloggers like us, because there is absolutely no point we can be sure of in terms of what will actually happen until and on the election day – so basically it’s everyone’s prediction that occur in reality.
For the record, on the poll, I voted for the third option, because in my view it is not sure, what impact Powell’s endorsement will actually have on Obama’s position – Powell is a part of Bush era, and an active republican [even republican presidential candidate in the past], and by the same token, he is one of the most formidable individuals in U.S. military circles, which McCain’s candidacy seems to appeal to.

Comment on The AmeriCain Variance by politicaljar

politicaljar — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 08:28:56 +0000

You have mentioned a couple of scenarios that would possibly happen to undermine either Obama’s lead, or the election in general. Recent comments, especially in Europe highlight something else – the Bradley-Wilder effect, which relates to declaring support to Obama in the polls in fear of being ‘virtually’ accused of racism. In that case Obama’s position in the polls may be miscalculated, also among the democrats, where as much as 17% of previously Clinton’s supporters declare voting for McCain.
In addition, the rally video proves absolute distinctiveness of this campaign, I have never seen equal amount of hate in previous campaigns, which probably will not be diminished with Obama in office, which to some extent may affect his presidency.
Great post by the way.

Comment on The AmeriCain Variance by pacer521

pacer521 — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 02:24:16 +0000

great postings and blog.

Comment on A House In Alaska by Olek

Olek — Wed, 17 Sep 2008 13:31:00 +0000

Excellent analysis, although I shall add few points.
In my view, McCain-Palin ticket is a clever and firm response to Obama’s surge as a popular tribune of America’s old and new generations. Republican strategists asserted prudently (and as it turned out later also correctly) a strength of a would-be storm of questions regarding her political profile that emerges after her nomination. Thus, attention that was focused on the democratic campaign and Obama’s popularity, both praise and critique,now turned to republican camp. The result of that – is Biden’s candidate deficiency, and increasing popularity (not always positive, but still) of Palin. Palin was an excellent choice, for the debate elaborating her personal and political credentials brightened McCain’s posture, which – it is fair to admit, represented everything BUT ‘change’. As far as I remember the entire campaign, I have never noticed McCain to appear on t-shirts or walls, it was Obama who won in this field of campaign spectrum, always (as Martin Luther King) symbolizing new era. Aforementioned action figures of Palin, may indicate a shift in republican strategy in the struggle to gain more popularity. among the younger part of the electorate.
Lastly, Palin’s nomination was more a blow to Obama himself, rather than Joe Biden. A question Democrats will have to answer now is whether they shall focus on REAL credentials [where Biden prevails in every aspect in my view, and hence criticize Palin's incredibility] or improving Biden’s candidatorial deficiency by exposing him more into political debate, taking a bit of attention of Obama’s back. I think that focusing on real abilities should be the right path to take.

Comment on Why Barack Obama Will Lose The Elections by preservetherepublic

preservetherepublic — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 04:57:14 +0000

Excellent points. Obama has been stumbling on a lot of questions lately. I don’t know what he was thinking with his VP pick. Clinton would have locked the election up for him. However, I think Obama’s recent slip in the polls have come from the media’s attacks on Palin. This is hurting him with independent voters. Last week, Ramussen gave Obama a 60% chance of winning. Now, they give McCain a 50.8% chance of winning.
This election is good for America because it is making conservatives and liberals examine what they believe. The issues only seem to be important as tools to push candidates into the presidency. People from both sides seem to have been exposed as not really caring so much for the issues they promote. An example would be the aerial hunting of wolves. I wonder if it would be an issue if Michelle Obama were doing it instead of Palin. If McCain had picked a pro-choice VP, would many pro-lifers have really stoof up? I’m sorry, I am getting off topic. As a McCain it is nice to see an Obama supporter feeling the same way about their party as I do mine.