Posts Tagged ‘barack obama’

Benefits of The Donald

Monday, October 19th, 2015

I missed the first Democratic debate of the 2016 election. I wanted to see it and being stuck on an airplane, with CNN, while it was on, seemed a fine coincidence. Except my Virgin America flight from LA to Boston was missing a quarter of the channels it was supposed to have, including CNN. And they didn’t want to reset too much of their entertainment equipment because the Dodger’s playoff game was coming in loud-and-clear and for some reason my fellow passengers seemed more interested in that.

From what I gather, the dog didn’t bark: Hillary is alive and Sanders is real. But that’s news. Likely it keeps Biden undecided until it is too late to get in.

Oh, and the guy from Maryland maybe has some bite.

The other two?

I’ve always liked Chafee, but he is disqualified for being funny looking, he can’t be elected president in 2016 without being more attractive on TV. A shame. I also saw a spin-room photo where he was being interviewed, surrounded by…one lone reporter. In the same room where Bernie was mobbed. Sad.

I used to like Webb, but I forget what earlier silliness from him was my letdown. But I am over him.

On to The Donald

As I have often repeated, I don’t dare root for a crazy-but-weak GOP candidate because in a two horse race the most embarrassing and lagging nag can win–if the other horse trips and falls. But that reticence doesn’t mean I can’t appreciate some aspects of GOP infighting and stunts.

In this case The Donald is taking on W’s reputation. It has been almost as if George II wasn’t even president on September 11th, 2001. Until Jeb! said “At least he kept us safe.”. A few liberals jumped on that and no one notices them.

But now The Donald is hitting Jeb! with the fact of what his brother’s job was at the time: President of the United States of America. And in true Donald-style, he isn’t being gentle about it. Legions of Ignorant Americans (who think the movie The Martian is based on a true story) are learning that George W. Bush maybe was a bad president. (“Really!?”)

Now if The Donald would only take on W’s torture, kidnapping, and arbitrary imprisonment.

Okay if he wants to leave alone W’s hollowing out of the federal government by driving scads of competent talent into retirement. (A dozen or so years from now, ask Barack about the consequences of that–he might not give a straight answer, but watch him take a deep breath and try not to roll is eyes.) Also okay if The Donald doesn’t want to touch W’s horrible deficits, before he very nearly plunged us into another Great Depression.

At some point it becomes implausible that George II was that bad, so best keep it believable…

But I would like the torture, kidnapping, and arbitrary imprisonment trotted out by a showman of The Donald’s calibre. Please?

-kb
©2015 Kent Borg

How Political “Red Meat” Works (and Isn’t Necessarily Bad)

Saturday, October 17th, 2015

[Sorry I wrote this back at the end of July but didn't post it then. Silly me. Maybe I never finished it. Does it look complete to you?]

I am sure political scientists have fancy names for this and organize conferences about it, but it is new to me, I just figured it out: how “red meat” works, and how it is made.

A freaky part of living in these times is that someone like Donald Trump can toss ridiculous “red meat” to the Republican base, and millions fall for it! How does that work? Today I spotted a rare attempt at left-wing “red meat” (What do we call left-wing “red meat”?) and it got me thinking in a little more depth.

It seems to be a three-part recipe:

1. Select a complicated problem, a problem that we must solve.

This needs to be something controversial–we can’t have a bipartisan solution or the result won’t be ideological red meat. And if you want traction with your public, it should be a familiar and topical problem.

2. Select a tenet of ideological dogma.

Something that is obviously true to anyone who looks at it, yet something that your political opponents inexplicably won’t see. How can anyone be so blind!? Some things are obvious!

3. Apply the dogma to the problem for a simple solution.

Simple solutions are naturally better than complicated and red meat needs to be simple. And if you want to really juicy, dripping red meat, it is better if it outrages your opponents, that helps solidify the distinction between good and evil. The solution doesn’t have to be practical nor make sense, it doesn’t have to actually address the original problem, but it does have to fit with the dogma chosen above.

If anyone argues against it, the true believer can easily dismiss any logic or facts, and see the complaint as a rejection of the dogma. It doesn’t matter if the objection is from the opposition or from the same side, the very fact that there is an objection is all one needs to know, only a non-believer could think such a thing. A valuable litmus test can be built this way.

A little marketing savvy helps in selecting and packaging the solution, but if done right the result is emotionally satisfying to the core of your ideological group and they won’t be able to resist it.

Right Wing Examples

Taxes. To the political right taxes are bad by definition. This dogma has been used to cut taxes. The slight detail that Republican presidents like Reagan or George W. Bush who put in big tax cuts had enormous deficits is a bit of reality that doesn’t need to be worried about, at least not on the Federal level where we have good credit and can run deficits. States don’t have this flexibility. Consider Kansas, the enormous GOP tax cuts have been a big problem, but as it is a red state, the Democrats can’t take over and take the heat, instead the GOP needs to fix it, so they make a point of not saying what they are doing is taxing. It is okay to defy reality, but never defy dogma.

Regulations. Regulations are almost the same as taxes, bad by definition to the political right. It doesn’t matter if the world is coming to an end, dogma can prompt one to deny it. In fact the more extreme the situation, the greater importance to preserve the dogma, for the dogma will save you.

Military might, we can’ be weak. More is better, we need to support our military. Even if this means starting wars that kill and maim our own and leaves us weaker, any argument against belligerence must be an argument for weakness.

Left Wing Examples

These are harder to come up with in 2015. Ronald Reagan did such a good job of changing the very agenda questions from not whether to cut socail programs or taxes, but how much to cut. He crushed the left and the Democrats have been marching to the right ever since. It it hard to throw read meat to the left when the crowd is constantly ambling to the right.

What’s left of the right today?

There’s Bernie Sanders! But he’s blast from a distant past. He has been a refugee who years ago found asylum in a distant and mythical place called “Vermont”. Pinko world he grew up in doesn’t exist anymore. He is one of the last isolated individuals of a species that looks as good as extinct. Maybe he can “breed” more political socialists, but it would be a dodo-back-from-the-dead miracle.

Isn’t there something newer available? Something with a glint of new?

There is (was?) the occupy movement. It had a lot of buzz and support and momentum…but I don’t remember those crowds getting any good red meat thrown to them. Why not?

What would it have taken?

Step 1: choose a complicated problem. That’s easy, we hate the big banks and WTO, get rid of them!

Good start! Almost there, now hit that over the head with an appropriate tenet of your dogma, see what pops our, and you’ll be done. There’s no right answer, pick any core article of your dogma and it can probably be applied. I can wait while you think it over. If you don’t like the word “dogma” think “philosophy” or “principles”; just pick one…

Silence.

The occupy movement had no overarching principles to guide it. No pocket-sized crib sheet to remind the followers what they were there for. People have said that the occupy movement didn’t have any leaders, but had they had some coherent doctrine, leaders would have naturally arisen as the ones who could select some nice red meat and organize around it.

Left Wing Attempt I Saw

Today there was news of Obama visiting Kenya, and it seems he was railing against corruption as a way to address Africa’s chronic poverty. Someone I follow on Twitter said that African poverty has “more to do with global trade structure than misbehavior”. And in in another tweet said: “If you’d sunk 1/5 of what went towards bailing out U.S. Banks to infrastructure in Africa it would change the continent, corruption or not.”

Sounds like the complaints from occupy, but then what? Where’s the meat?

I compare this to red meat because this person is not objecting to fighting corruption but, if I may put words into his mouth, he seems to be longing for something bigger and better–though international development is tricky, it is never clear whether any specific bigger and better project by outsiders helps more than it might unintentionally hurt. And this person knows more about foolish development projects in Africa than I do.

But I think a good piece of red meat is longed for by much of the left: some satisfying, simple solution, to a real problem, a solution that grows from guiding principles.

When Making Political Movements: Red Meat, Not All Bad

You can’t have a political movement without someone articulating some direction, something to organize how the movement should move. Present a problem, apply a dogma/principle/philosophy, and let your follows see the inexorable logic in your solution. Let them go forth and repeat the argument to others, throw your followers some red meat.

When Red Meat Goes Bad

Why does “red meat” have such bad connotations? Because in recent years it has been a cynical way rally the right wing base with extremism that (1) isn’t practical or even based in reality, and (2) leaves the party estranged with some important voting blocks.

The Republicans have so alienated blacks and Hispanics that they can’t win the White House any time soon. Not unless the Democrats throw a presidential election: say, nominate someone clunky, lacking in charisma, with her own accumulated negatives (plausible?), who then has a big stumble and fall, letting even the lamest Republican nominee to win.

Political Predictions, Red Meat or Not

The GOP is in trouble and will stay that way until the last of the gone-rabid Greatest Generation dies off, and the GOP drops the race-bating, and quits with the culture wars which they have lost. Then they can maybe drift back to something my grandfathers would have recognized.

What of the other side? The left is maybe terribly disorganized, but it might find focus by simply drawing on Democratic principles. Bernie Sanders might look like a longshot for being elected president, but he is drawing crowds with his consistent old message. And, though not running for president, Elizabeth Warren is making pretty good hay doing a “Democratic-wing of the Democratic party”-thing, and doing something pretty occupy-compatible in the process.

-kb
©2015 Kent Borg

Merkel’s Telephone: How Secure Does She WANT it to be?

Monday, October 28th, 2013

The news that the NSA has been listening in on German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s cellphone had me wondering, as a techie who has paid some attention to computer security, how would I recommend the Germans secure her phone?  It is an interesting puzzle to think through.  And part of my approach would involve other European countries, pick an open source cellphone encryption program, and work it over, audit all its security aspects, make improvements, and put a EU stamp of approval on it. Make sure it really is secure.

Then yesterday I read something about what is known about how her calls are secured and was disappointed that they apparently use proprietary encryption products. This is a mistake. You don’t know what is in a commercial product, with secret source code, mostly no one does, not even the commercial folks producing it.  Remember the Swiss company Crypto AG?  They had an NSA backdoor in their encryption products.  A lot of people worked on that product and a lot of people used it, and most of them didn’t know what they were using, they didn’t know that the NSA had a backdoor because it is easy to hide something in a commercial product.  With open source programs it is harder to hide something, because it has to be in plain sight. If Merkel wants security she should use open source. And if she isn’t sure an open source program is secure she should put some talent on going over it with a fine-tooth-comb to find and fix any holes.

And, there is the question of what the NSA heard: did they crack the encrypted calls or just the regular calls between her phone and regular phones?  If Merkel wants to make secure calls the other person on the call needs to be on a secure call.  If the NSA can listen to everyone then there is no one for Merkel to talk to.

How much does she care?  The German government has its own security services, do they listen in on phone calls, too?

Ah, there is the rub: If she wants her population to be easy to listen in on, she is easy to listen in on, at least if she wants to talk to anyone outside a small circle.

How much privacy does Merkel want for herself? How much privacy does Merkel want for others?

-kb, the Kent who feels like less of a crank in recent months.

© 2013 by Kent Borg

Susan Rice is Bad Choice for Secretary of State–at the Moment

Wednesday, November 28th, 2012

When I heard what Ambassador Rice had to say about Benghazi, what she said repeatedly on all those Sunday shows that day, I was startled but I withheld judgement, I figured she knew something I didn’t.  Well, it seems she knew less than did an informed member of the general public.

We need a Secretary of State who doesn’t say stupid things in public, over and over again, just because someone tells her to.  The Benghazi talking points didn’t smell right at the time, and she should have known better.

I have liked Susan Rice, but this is embarrassing, I hope the President picks someone else to succeed Secretary Clinton.

That said, if the President does choose Rice, the Senate should let him have his choice.  Their job in confirming appointees is to veto really bad choices.  Susan Rice is not a really bad choice, just a bad choice.  (John McCain is making a fool of himself here.)

Rice should get on with her life, and once she is best known for something other than this episode, then she can again look for ways to move up.

After the 2008 primary campaign, Hillary Clinton was not smelling like a rose either.  Known for being a wife, short-term senator from an adopted state, and a nasty campaigner, she was not a formidable politician, she might have even lost to John McCain had she been in that race.  But she has paid her dues and is now known as a fine stateswoman: disciplined, seasoned, and hard working.  And what does it get her?  The 2016 nomination–if she wants it (and if nothing goes wrong).  I don’t know what is next for Susan Rice, but now is not the time to find out, better to cool it.

-kb, the Kent who knows no one reads this stuff, but who still likes getting his ideas down, so he can later look back and see what a fool he was (or was not).

P.S.  Why was it reasonable for a tarnished Hillary Clinton to get the Secretary of State job but isn’t for a tarnished Susan Rice?  Because even losing the 2008 primary race, Clinton was still a big deal; being Secretary of State and taking orders from her recent opponent, was not a big promotion for her.  For a 48-year-old UN Ambassador, however, running the State Department is big stuff and a different world.  Just ask John Kerry, who, after being his party’s presidential candidate and serving nearly 30-years in the Senate, is probably stuck in Massachusetts, because the Democrats want to keep Scott Brown out of Washington.

© 2012 by Kent Borg

To Release or Not Release bin Laden Photos: A Most Productive Argument

Wednesday, May 4th, 2011

Nice to have a few things go right.

Sure, the initial reports of the raid on bin Laden’s hideout were a bit confused and got corrected, and will get further corrections, but, if I may parrot others in this cliché, that’s why they call it the “fog of war”.  Even when things go stunningly right, things go wrong.  Reality is always a bit messy.  And reality is good.

Also fun to watch Pakistan argue with itself:

“We are incompetent! He was right under our noses and we couldn’t sniff him out!”

“We are not incompent!  We knew all a long…um, ah, I mean…”

“No.  We aren’t that unified.  Yes, our president might have said he didn’t know where bin Laden was.  He was telling the truth.  We don’t tell him everything.”

“We are incompetent! The Americans flew practically right to our most important military academy, started shooting and blowing things up, stayed around for 40-minutes, and we didn’t really notice.”

Yes, nice to have things go right for the USA.

Though, that isn’t the news here.  A lot of things have gone right for this administration, the news is that they are finally getting credit.  After two-plus years in office, Barack Obama’s administration might have finally figured out how to get their horn blown.

Take the case of the bloody photos of bin Laden’s head partly blown away by a shot to his left eye.  The CIA director says that they probably will be released, eventually.

Anderson Cooper has probably already rehearsed his somber warning that maybe we should all turn away before he shows us the picture, milking it, delaying (so dad can make it back from the kitchen with his beer and not miss anything), and…only showing us the image once…he is sure his warning has maximized the audience. These pictures are so real CNN practically taste the ratings.

The White House then mutters about it being the president’s decision.

Many hours pass, long enough for indignation and outrage to start to build in the Muslim world over such disrespectful pictures being released.  Finally, hours later, it leaks that President Obama has decided not to release the pictures.  (It is probably official by the time you read this.)

Perfect!  Like the mostly-never-seen shark in Jaws, these pictures are most real and vivid before we see them.  Showing them has clear downsides.  Refusing to show them has different downsides.  But having the administration spending two days arguing in public about whether to release them has none of the downside, and tons of upside.  Getting everyone weighing in on whether to release or not release makes them all buy in on the premise that the pictures exist.  Did we manage to get some of the Muslim world on record saying it would be terrible to release the photos?  Hamas? Iran??  Gosh, I hope so.  It might make it harder for them to later convince anyone he is still alive.

CIA Director Leon Panetta had to be on the losing side of predicting they would eventually be released, but he can handle that.  (And he might eventually be right.)

How tidy.  Things don’t happen this nicely by accident.  The Obama administration is getting good at the PR side of their job.

-kb, the Kent who wonders whether he smells a Plouffe, or maybe just a clever PotUS who can walk, chew gum, and get things done.

©2011 Kent Borg

The ’00s Are Over!

Tuesday, May 3rd, 2011

Culturally the ’60s didn’t begin until about 1963 and lasted until about 1973. A powerful decade even with sloppy dates.

The ’00s have more precise dates: September 11th 2001 to May 2nd 2011.

Not everything in that decade is so tidy. Obama’s Cairo speech on June 4th, 2009, was a preview of the ’10s just as Bush v. Gore, on December 12th, 2000, was a preview of the ’00s. And there will be other exceptions, but these are pretty good dates. Too bad it was such a sorry decade.

What an embarrassment to have to admit it was Osama bin Laden’s decade. He got us to embrace fear, be proud of torture, invade on lies, govern by truthiness, and nearly ruin the global economy.

Count me as one who is happy to see that decade behind us.

-kb, the Kent who thinks it is a good sign we don’t have a current security alert as a CYA “just in case” measure.

©2011 Kent Borg

Obama Not Entirely Honest about Birth Certificate — and Will be Reelected

Wednesday, April 27th, 2011

Today the White House released Barack Hussein Obama’s “real” birth certificate.

I decided to do a little polling and had a question for someone I know who is conservative.  Let’s call him, um, “Joe”.

“Hey Joe.  Where was Obama born?”
“Hawaii!”
“Thanks!”

Dang.  That wasn’t the answer I wanted, but I am still convinced there are a LOT of Americans who will say “Kenya!”  “Joe” just isn’t one of them.

Let me tell you the truth about this: the White House is not being entirely honest here.

The president said that “We’re not going to be able to solve our problems if we get distracted by sideshows and carnival barkers.”, the implication being that by releasing this document the distraction will somehow end.  It won’t.  Nothing will satisfy the birthers, nothing short of an admission that the 44th president was really born in Kenya followed by an apology and a resignation.  But he was born in Hawaii and is sticking to that story.  (He doesn’t actually remember being born in Hawaii.  He doesn’t directly know where he was born.  Rather, he looked at the evidence and rationally concluded that he was, indeed, born in Hawaii.  All rational people who look at the facts conclude he was born in Hawaii.)

No, the dishonesty is that they know perfectly well that the release of this document is only going to add fuel to the fire in the heart of every true birther, and that is good for Obama’s reelection.

The reason the White House released this document now is because most of the nation has come to accept that he is legitimately president, and that the birthers are wackos.

What a great time to feed some red meat to the wackos and get them really going!  The rest of the nation will shake their collective heads and wonder how we are going to bring down the deficit.

Obama will win in 2012.  He isn’t taking it for granted, and that is why he will win.

-kb, the Kent who be watching Michele Bachmann’s reaction, to judge whether she is really a true birther in her heart.

©2011 Kent Borg