Hillary Should Go Back To Arkansas...

...And Become "The Greatest American"

Think about it. What could be the most important policy change for America - universal public health care. Both the Democratic Party candidates appear to believe in it yet neither has put real Canadian style "Medicare" in their platform. Why is that. One can only speculate that it is because they believe it would not be possible to implement in the United States.

Hillary Clinton should step back and read some Canadian history. Where did Canadian "Medicare" originate. In Saskatchewan, one of the poorest Canadian provinces. Hillary should go back to Arkansas and convince the state Democratic Party to run on a platform of implementing real "Medicare", get elected Governor and do it.

I know the American political system is different but for something that important it is worth a try, even if just to put pressure on the federal Democratic Party.

That would be a legacy much greater than being just being another President.

"I Am Not a Racist ..."

What's the difference between these two statements.

"I am not a racist it's just that I can't hire black staff because most of my customers are racist."

"I am not a racist it's just that we can't pick a black candidate because most of the voters are racists."

The Democratic Party Dream Ticket That Could Have Been

Very early in the United States presidential election primary process it became very obvious that there were two clear Democratic Party front runners, both with their own unique appeal to the electorate and both representing a radical change from what until then was seen as inevitable - that the president be a white man. Both leading candidates were highly qualified with good reputations.

What if at that time the leading candidates had seen the opportunity for a Democratic Party Dream Ticket, and decided that whoever came in second would be the vice presidential candidate. This agreement could have been kept private or made public. This agreement would inevitably have required a commitment from the candidates to run clean and positive campaigns, and not only not attack their opponents, but praise them for their qualifications as the best person to replace them as president if the need ever occurred.

It would have changed the whole dynamic of the election process, united and revitalized the Democratic Party and possibly ensured a Democratic presidential victory.

What we have now is more of a Democratic Party Nightmare with the leading Democratic candidates attacking their fellow Democrats with the zeal that is usually reserved for the Republican presidential candidate. Whichever candidate wins is going to face the Republican candidate with his or her reputation tarnished, not by attacks from the Republicans, but by attacks from within his or her own party.

That’s some way to run an election campaign.

Does 911 Help Barack Obama

Though some will think this question is in poor taste I think it is an interesting one.

Many were very surprised when the two leading contenders for the United States Democratic Party nomination for President turned out to be a white woman and a black man. Until then conventional wisdom was that the United States was not ready for a black, or a female, President.

Hilary Clinton’s case is unique, as the wife of a former President, but of course there are other factors at play there as well.

In the case of Obama, while racism may not be as rampant in the United States as it once was, presidential elections can be won by very narrow margins and it would only take a small percentage of voters who would never vote for a black candidate to defeat him. Yet, he may become the Democratic nominee.

Part of the reason for that may be that the racism dynamic in the United States appears to be changing. Racism, though expressed in hate, is based on fear. Traditional racism in the United States was born with the end of slavery as white men began to fear free black men - afraid they would seek revenge for slavery, defile their women and take their jobs. It may have been irrational but it was used by many to their own personal and political advantage and justified by religion.

With 911, or more precisely, the response of the United States government to 911, the racism dynamic was changed. It is no longer white vs black but Christianity vs Islam. It may be just as irrational but it is just as real.

Indeed those using racism to attack Obama are not doing it on the basis of his blackness but are trying to label him as a Muslim. They put undue emphasis on his middle name, “Hussein”, which is of Arab origin and by inference Muslim. As well they refer to his alleged “Muslim father”, although Biography.com states “His father, Barack Obama, Sr., was born of Luo ethnicity in Nyanza Province, Kenya. He grew up herding goats with his own father, who was a domestic servant to the British. Although reared among Muslims, Obama, Sr., became an atheist at some point.”

But the Muslim labeling appears not to be having any significant effect on voters and his blackness appears to be seen as an asset rather than a liability.

If Barack Obama is elected President it will be on his own merits and his ability to reach the minds and souls of the American people with his message of change, but it may very well have been made possible by the changing dynamic of racism in the United States

I Hope You’re All Offended

I have no intention of apologizing for this, nor of apologizing for something without knowing what it is I am apologizing for. But apparently that is not so for at least one politician.

The CBC reports that “Federal Fisheries Minister Loyola Hearn has apologized for a joke he's not sure he made, responding to a complaint from a politician who didn't hear it.”

You cannot get more insincere than apologizing for something when you don’t even know, or apparently care, what it is you are apologizing for.

The politician clarified his apology by stating “"I have never, ever in my life intentionally said anything that would offend anybody, and if I did on the weekend, I sincerely apologize because it's not what I do, or how I do it,"

I have great respect for politicians and government and even countries that can admit that they are wrong and sincerely apologize for it, because it was wrong. It is an indication that they have reflected on their words or actions and learned from them.

I have little respect for politicians who are so afraid of offending someone that they apologize without even knowing what they are apologizing for.

The problem with that attitude is that the easiest way not to offend anyone is to do or say nothing of significance. It is the election strategy of getting elected by offending the least number of voters rather than attracting the largest number of voters. It is a strategy that leads one to support the status quo rather than rocking the boat with new ideas. It is a battle that is being fought out today in the United States Democratic Party primaries between the candidate who has experience with doing things the way they have always been done and the candidate of change, however undefined that change might be.

While Mr. Hearn's apology might have been initiated by jokes during a speech it reflects a broader mindset.

With the state of the world today. We need change. We need new ideas. New ideas will always offend some people. We do not need politicians with a mindset that says that the most important thing is not offending people.

Are Americans Ready to Make History

John Edwards departure from the Democratic Party race means that Americans will have to make history and elect the first black man or the first white woman as President if a Democrat is to become President. Are they ready for that.

The other question is whether the front runners, now even more focussed on each other, are going to fight the Republican Party's campaign for them. Certainly if I was running the Republican election machine I would already be preparing to use the losing Democrat's words against the winning one. I foresee a whole series of Republican Party ads featuring Clinton or Obama telling the American people why the other Democrat is not fit to be President.

It's the American system and after studying Political Science and working for the House of Commons for over thirty years I still do not really understand it, though I do enjoy watching it from a distance.