I don't exactly quite understand why the dump on Sarah Palin? Oh, you know why? Because she is a threat in 2012. They are trying to make her weak before 2012, from both the conservative side and from the liberal media side.
Let's get something about human beings, right on top of the table. The fact that in order to be the man, you have to beat the man- in this case, the woman. Sarah Palin, has garnered the respect of the American people. She does not fit the typical mode of a politician, and not even for a woman politician. She is smart and sexy, to boot. Hillary Clinton, could never have looked so good, being so competent all at the same time. She is [Palin] going through a post election phase and McCain and herself, are paying the price for not winning the election-- the conservative Presidential wannabes are pulling out the Ginsu knives for this special carving of the rest of Sarah Palin's image.
But, the American people, and, people world wide are much smarter than that. There is not a darn thing wrong with Sarah Palin. She was not the reason John McCain lost, as it was any reason why Obama won or anymore reason to why McCain is the reason he lost. In fact, if it was not for Sarah Palin energizing the conservative base, McCain would not have gotten so far--as well as her garnering the female vote. The female vote, is something in which was in mind when they chose her, in the first place--regardless of her stance on the Roe vs Wade argument. Conservative Presidential wannabes know this and are trying to push her out of the picture. Sick? Nah!! Just politics!
Now, we have sorted out why the conservatives want her out of the picture. But now, lets turn to the liberal left loonies. The liberals want her out of the picture because, when she winds up in 2012, she will be a force to reckon with. The way I see it, Obama, will have a very tough cultural sell to the American people. That being, regardless of the high virtue of any president or wannabe, extolling the message of economic stability, you have to pass the cultural 'sniff-test'. Obama, has got to get it right, or, SEE-YA! How quickly the people forget that you, if, he does, guide them through this tough economic time. It will be no longer bon ton to say what a great African American young man we have in President Obama. And, no longer, will a Sarah Palin be thought of as a neophyte to American politics. The two shall meet and liberals, are wetting their pants, amidst this win, of the sheer thought of it in 2012.
In all honesty, the travesty of this election, is the bashing and subsequent depredation of Sarah Palin's image-- like Bush, Cheney, an old McCain and a worsening American and global economy, which many think were steered into by the three men mentioned, was not the reason the American people found Obama, palatable!
The references to her children, were cruel. The innuendos about her husband, were out of order. The attacks on her, because she was pretty and smart, through the disgusting Hustler porn movie, was an all out outrage. The liberal media's portrayal and attack on her, using those very same lines, was unforgivable and the American people, will continue to watch and follow other forms of information sources, because it was simply just too much on one woman, who had the audacity to be a leader in these tough times.
If Sarah Palin were to be back in 2012, and, Obama does not deliver--I don't care who he is--I support the American people in voting him out and putting her, in. Obama would understand and he had better deliver.
But, the truth of it is, and whether or not the liberals and the Democrats realize this, is that Obama, has almost been granted, even though he has to run again, the right to win again in 2012. I say that, to say this; 1. He came in at a time where it has no other choice but to get better, 2. He is a really nice guy and everyone likes him, 3. He does not appear to have that twinge of corruption, looming around him like so many others and 4. If he keeps being, well, Obama, why not give the young man 8 years---8 years of Obama, even as a lame duck, would be better than anything the doctor ordered, in regards to 'real' change and the incentive and the capacity to do it.
So, Sarah Palin may run into another problem in 2012--Obama! But, the dumping on her, by all parties involved, should stop, because, it is just flat out disgusting and it may actually work against you and hurt your chances in the future, through the American people seeing that you are just too power hungry, for us to take serious.
America has changed. Race politics and the politics of attack, are over. They did not get Obama the win and neither did it help McCain and neither will it get anyone a win, in the future.
Youri
Thursday, November 6, 2008
Kirchner wants your money!
Well, at least Argentine pension fund money. Apparently, Mrs. Christina Kirchner, who is also the wife of the former president of Argentina, Mr. Nestor Kirchner, is set to rake into the government portfolio; Argentine pension funds. GASP!!! Well, it should not be so shocking for her or anyone, to think about doing that.
This is a move, which some have taken up in arms against, understandably. Ms. Kirchner has said that nationalizing the pension scheme, would protect Argentine pensioner's from the global financial crisis. But, her opponents, have said that nationalizing the pension scheme, is being sought by her and her government in an attempt to pay for the Argentine debt, which it defaulted on, during the Argentine economic crisis and subsequent collapse between 1999 and 2002.
The pension portfolio in Argentina which she has her sights set on is worth over $30 billion USD.
Now, my thing is, nationalizing pensions, is not a bad thing considering the risk portfolio that Argentine trades 'may' be exposed to, considering that there has been no legislation, to counter-act or protect the Argentine market, from the most recent and same credit crisis that has hit the USA and Europe. Reports have it that emerging markets, especially in Latin America, are faring much better than anyone had expected- time will tell, indeed. Her move, however, is one where she can possibly seize a moment and actually do something proactive Argentinians and protect, just in the event of, traders and hedge funds losing Argentine pension's in this time of global economic uncertainty; $30 billion to play with, leverage and hedge for, is something anyone in the private market, would jump for. I would.
Now, the argument may be bolstered by the 'supposes" Suppose that Argentina, may not be as deeply rooted in the type of trading on derivatives and interwoven in the US big financials as one would imagine. However, it is the private market and Argentina, has one of the best run private Latin American markets to date; barring the economic crisis. A crisis, which can happen to any country and any financial system- just ask the USofA and Wall Street. So, as with the US financial crisis and their private market- along with their keen and standard bearing regulations- have yet to come to appreciate, the total risk exposure to all parties involved in the current financial crisis. Argentina, which one can assume if trying to resemble and more loosely regulated than that of the USA, may have that same type of market intelligence; or lack thereof.
While I would support the move to nationalize pensions- nationalizing, really has given the term and the initiative behind it, bad press- however, there would be certain stipulations and guidelines, to which I would allow Mrs. Kirchner the right to 'stabilize' Argentine pensions.
For one, I would appoint an overseer from the private market, to manage the portfolio and unwind any risk they have received, if any, from sub-prime and US and EU banks. And, the team of specialized instrument managers, would have no tie to the public service, at all. However, they must answer to government regulators on a weekly, if not daily basis. Public servants would only be used as clerical or, middle management, taking orders to do this and to do that.
Second, the move would only be temporary. Temporary, in the sense of one year- at best. That would give regulators, the kind of time needed, to investigate the integrity of the funds and release them- after they have received a full bill of health- back into the private market.
Third, regulators on the opposition side, must come together on this and not make this political. I hate pork. But, give those political animals, PORK! Shut em up and shut em down. Money talks. Make it talk so loud, til it puts the political animals, to a whimper.
And, lastly, if you can't get a coalition behind you, who would actually want to correct the Argentine default, then, you simply have to let it slide and tax EVERYONE. It sounds unfair, but everyone has to pay for the bill, if you want Argentina to be strong and secure, for a long future ahead.
To be honest, not that I would want a smash and grab on pensions, this time, to pay for any bad government debt. However, if it is a way out then it is a way out.
Other than that, Mrs. Kirchner is going to create allot of havoc in the market, and really not get anything done. My thing is now, nationalize it now, with very stringent stipulations and then worry about the market jitters, later- fact is, there has already been market jitters, as pension related assets and the Argentine market in general, has plummeted amidst talk of the nationalization.
The damage has been done to market confidence. So, just complete the deal already. Allay the fears and keep pension trading, for the short term, out of public administrators hands and unwind any bad debt and exposure it has to the larger financial institutions, which have the capacity to be more corrupt and unaccountable than government would. Because, two economic crises in the space of ten years, really is not something any country would want to endure.
Youri
This is a move, which some have taken up in arms against, understandably. Ms. Kirchner has said that nationalizing the pension scheme, would protect Argentine pensioner's from the global financial crisis. But, her opponents, have said that nationalizing the pension scheme, is being sought by her and her government in an attempt to pay for the Argentine debt, which it defaulted on, during the Argentine economic crisis and subsequent collapse between 1999 and 2002.
The pension portfolio in Argentina which she has her sights set on is worth over $30 billion USD.
Now, my thing is, nationalizing pensions, is not a bad thing considering the risk portfolio that Argentine trades 'may' be exposed to, considering that there has been no legislation, to counter-act or protect the Argentine market, from the most recent and same credit crisis that has hit the USA and Europe. Reports have it that emerging markets, especially in Latin America, are faring much better than anyone had expected- time will tell, indeed. Her move, however, is one where she can possibly seize a moment and actually do something proactive Argentinians and protect, just in the event of, traders and hedge funds losing Argentine pension's in this time of global economic uncertainty; $30 billion to play with, leverage and hedge for, is something anyone in the private market, would jump for. I would.
Now, the argument may be bolstered by the 'supposes" Suppose that Argentina, may not be as deeply rooted in the type of trading on derivatives and interwoven in the US big financials as one would imagine. However, it is the private market and Argentina, has one of the best run private Latin American markets to date; barring the economic crisis. A crisis, which can happen to any country and any financial system- just ask the USofA and Wall Street. So, as with the US financial crisis and their private market- along with their keen and standard bearing regulations- have yet to come to appreciate, the total risk exposure to all parties involved in the current financial crisis. Argentina, which one can assume if trying to resemble and more loosely regulated than that of the USA, may have that same type of market intelligence; or lack thereof.
While I would support the move to nationalize pensions- nationalizing, really has given the term and the initiative behind it, bad press- however, there would be certain stipulations and guidelines, to which I would allow Mrs. Kirchner the right to 'stabilize' Argentine pensions.
For one, I would appoint an overseer from the private market, to manage the portfolio and unwind any risk they have received, if any, from sub-prime and US and EU banks. And, the team of specialized instrument managers, would have no tie to the public service, at all. However, they must answer to government regulators on a weekly, if not daily basis. Public servants would only be used as clerical or, middle management, taking orders to do this and to do that.
Second, the move would only be temporary. Temporary, in the sense of one year- at best. That would give regulators, the kind of time needed, to investigate the integrity of the funds and release them- after they have received a full bill of health- back into the private market.
Third, regulators on the opposition side, must come together on this and not make this political. I hate pork. But, give those political animals, PORK! Shut em up and shut em down. Money talks. Make it talk so loud, til it puts the political animals, to a whimper.
And, lastly, if you can't get a coalition behind you, who would actually want to correct the Argentine default, then, you simply have to let it slide and tax EVERYONE. It sounds unfair, but everyone has to pay for the bill, if you want Argentina to be strong and secure, for a long future ahead.
To be honest, not that I would want a smash and grab on pensions, this time, to pay for any bad government debt. However, if it is a way out then it is a way out.
Other than that, Mrs. Kirchner is going to create allot of havoc in the market, and really not get anything done. My thing is now, nationalize it now, with very stringent stipulations and then worry about the market jitters, later- fact is, there has already been market jitters, as pension related assets and the Argentine market in general, has plummeted amidst talk of the nationalization.
The damage has been done to market confidence. So, just complete the deal already. Allay the fears and keep pension trading, for the short term, out of public administrators hands and unwind any bad debt and exposure it has to the larger financial institutions, which have the capacity to be more corrupt and unaccountable than government would. Because, two economic crises in the space of ten years, really is not something any country would want to endure.
Youri
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Lamy wants more! Why!?!?!
Well, depending on who you are, the good or bad news is that it was announced from the WTO website that it's current director, Pascal Lamy, will be seeking reelection in 2009.
http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news08_e/pl_second_term_e.htm
Lamy presided over a failed Doha Round of trade negotiations, where agreements on subsidies on agriculture, was the key sticking point- again- and over a process, which got deeper in terminology and sophisticated measures and counter-measures, with little or no results. I wonder how much did it cost, over time, to run an operation with such suit's, counter-suit's and appellate investigation's as had the WTO in the last 3 years? Has to be in the hundreds of millions!
Aside from an organizational and direction standpoint of Lamy's lack of leadership. He is not, in my view, a significant figure of resolve, in the time where the world trading and financial system, is in need of an overhaul and re-tooling. It may be best that Lamy sit it out this time. He has not brought 'positive' change to the WTO. And, in fact, he has let members run willy nilly, with no firm direction or vision from his directorate's leadership position. He allowed emerging economies to set the agenda and he allowed the USA, to bi-pas critical standards on tariff rates and the countervailing duties of the Byrd Amendment. Not to forget, how the EU, slipped into bi-lateral negotiations, rather than waiting on the WTO directorate, to sort out differences in trade imbalances and build alliances within the multi-lateral the rules based system. Basically, he was a benign director, with little or no impact on any relevant trade issue.
Alas, he has been on the talk circuit- and no doubt the private cocktail circuit- with speeches and pontifications, on how things should be and what is needed to push the Doha Development Agenda along. Most recently his speech to the Geneva Shipping Industry, for Commodities Week.
http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/sppl_e/sppl106_e.htm
Through all of this however, he has been giving the public a 'realistic' view on trade matters, especially in regards to the winners and losers; which the latter, there are, will be and will always be, significant losers. We, as the general public, have to face up to that fact and, if only to save his skin and reputation, he has been a bulwark for such refreshing truth- even though he still sides against world economist's like Robert Wade and the new Nobel Prize winner, Paul Krugman, with free-trade as a panacea to development; especially in regards to developing countries.
But, even more distressing, Lamy's sterility as a leader, is ever more emphasised in a "French-friendly" global led system and environment. IMF Directorate/ECB Commissioner's office/Deputy EU Commissioner's office/Presidency of the EU...ALL led by Frenchmen. And, the kicker is, the foremost political organization on economic development, the OECD, is based in Paris France. Lamy, had no excuse not to get a deal on Doha, even if developing countries were still kicking and crying; most notable, India and Brazil.
So, I guess you can read by this blog that, while I am no fan of unfettered free-trade, Lamy has not been a good steward of his institution and I think, as with the US presidency, we need a change.
Just my opinion!
Youri
http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news08_e/pl_second_term_e.htm
Lamy presided over a failed Doha Round of trade negotiations, where agreements on subsidies on agriculture, was the key sticking point- again- and over a process, which got deeper in terminology and sophisticated measures and counter-measures, with little or no results. I wonder how much did it cost, over time, to run an operation with such suit's, counter-suit's and appellate investigation's as had the WTO in the last 3 years? Has to be in the hundreds of millions!
Aside from an organizational and direction standpoint of Lamy's lack of leadership. He is not, in my view, a significant figure of resolve, in the time where the world trading and financial system, is in need of an overhaul and re-tooling. It may be best that Lamy sit it out this time. He has not brought 'positive' change to the WTO. And, in fact, he has let members run willy nilly, with no firm direction or vision from his directorate's leadership position. He allowed emerging economies to set the agenda and he allowed the USA, to bi-pas critical standards on tariff rates and the countervailing duties of the Byrd Amendment. Not to forget, how the EU, slipped into bi-lateral negotiations, rather than waiting on the WTO directorate, to sort out differences in trade imbalances and build alliances within the multi-lateral the rules based system. Basically, he was a benign director, with little or no impact on any relevant trade issue.
Alas, he has been on the talk circuit- and no doubt the private cocktail circuit- with speeches and pontifications, on how things should be and what is needed to push the Doha Development Agenda along. Most recently his speech to the Geneva Shipping Industry, for Commodities Week.
http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/sppl_e/sppl106_e.htm
Through all of this however, he has been giving the public a 'realistic' view on trade matters, especially in regards to the winners and losers; which the latter, there are, will be and will always be, significant losers. We, as the general public, have to face up to that fact and, if only to save his skin and reputation, he has been a bulwark for such refreshing truth- even though he still sides against world economist's like Robert Wade and the new Nobel Prize winner, Paul Krugman, with free-trade as a panacea to development; especially in regards to developing countries.
But, even more distressing, Lamy's sterility as a leader, is ever more emphasised in a "French-friendly" global led system and environment. IMF Directorate/ECB Commissioner's office/Deputy EU Commissioner's office/Presidency of the EU...ALL led by Frenchmen. And, the kicker is, the foremost political organization on economic development, the OECD, is based in Paris France. Lamy, had no excuse not to get a deal on Doha, even if developing countries were still kicking and crying; most notable, India and Brazil.
So, I guess you can read by this blog that, while I am no fan of unfettered free-trade, Lamy has not been a good steward of his institution and I think, as with the US presidency, we need a change.
Just my opinion!
Youri
Obama won!
Bittersweet victory it is for Barack Husein Obama, the 44th President of the United States of America.
There is allot to do and allot to consider, considering the world the way it is; terrorism, financial crisis that spread globally, a very short list of allies and a weakening earth, physically!
On top of all of that, he has to find time to grieve for his beloved grandmother. My condolences.
Other than that, the USofA has it's first African American president!
Youri
There is allot to do and allot to consider, considering the world the way it is; terrorism, financial crisis that spread globally, a very short list of allies and a weakening earth, physically!
On top of all of that, he has to find time to grieve for his beloved grandmother. My condolences.
Other than that, the USofA has it's first African American president!
Youri
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
An Act of God...or the CIA!
That's, apparently, what it will take for Barack Obama to lose this election. If he does, that's who most folks would blame it on. But, what if he does lose? What would happen? Would there be massive protests? Would McCain be ready, after all of this self defeatist talk? Would the American people accept it, and build possible excuses for it?
Perhaps all of it. But, one thing is certain, that whoever wins, change will come to Washington--even as obvious as it seems. Bush has to go. McCain is a Republican, but he sure is no GW. Obama is certainly not a Republican and neither does he have their tendencies--something which I hope we can work on. However, even if his cousin is Dick Cheney, change will come and that is welcomed.
So, as we watch and wait, we will see if whether or not the polls were slightly off, wrong, or, dead wrong! And then, wait to see what would happen after it may, possibly, call John McCain the next President of the USofA!
I shudder to think of what would happen to allot of folks in the USA. And, all of the folks in black countries all over the world, and, the black community in the USA at large, if Obama does not win. Simultaneous heart attacks! A storm on the White House....all too far fetched? Perhaps! But, we can only ponder these as possible a scenarios!
Youri
Perhaps all of it. But, one thing is certain, that whoever wins, change will come to Washington--even as obvious as it seems. Bush has to go. McCain is a Republican, but he sure is no GW. Obama is certainly not a Republican and neither does he have their tendencies--something which I hope we can work on. However, even if his cousin is Dick Cheney, change will come and that is welcomed.
So, as we watch and wait, we will see if whether or not the polls were slightly off, wrong, or, dead wrong! And then, wait to see what would happen after it may, possibly, call John McCain the next President of the USofA!
I shudder to think of what would happen to allot of folks in the USA. And, all of the folks in black countries all over the world, and, the black community in the USA at large, if Obama does not win. Simultaneous heart attacks! A storm on the White House....all too far fetched? Perhaps! But, we can only ponder these as possible a scenarios!
Youri
Monday, November 3, 2008
November 4th means "Power to the People"...
I think it would only be fitting that I dedicated my 'second' post on this board and topical to this board's purpose, to the upcoming November 4th, 2008 US Presidential Elections.
I support Barack Obama, 75%. While I make no reservations in saying that I am a, GASP, "Black Conservative", and, unashemedly support the Republican party on most issues- economic, poltical and social- I am, in Colin Powell fashion, supporting Obama, anyway!
While it may appear to be a racist move. And it is a racially motivated decision. Fact of the matter is, in its racist way, that is what America needs right now. Maybe this would put a new spin on the race argument in that racism, may not all the time be a bad thing. You can have good racism. Like Obama's case. The fact that he is black, lends itself to the sentiment that anyone, from anywhere, can one day become the President of the most powerful country in the world. Only in America! True indeed. This more than lifts the spirits of the American people, from all races, creeds and colours, through securing and solidifying in them the notion that you CAN sucede in the United States of America, despite the odds and despite the stranglehold elites have on Washington DC. After these last 3 years, in particular, America needs a national 'feel good' moment. McCain can't deliver that, I feel. And, more importantly, Obama ain't a dumb dude! He really can be the President of the USA--I place more confidence in him, than most of the other Presidential nominee's in the last 8 years, barring a Kerry and maybe Gore. Even though they were Democrats, they had an intellectualism that made them appear competent, and capable, over anyone in the race. But, being smart, does not necessarily mean you should be the President of the USofA--just ask both of them.
However, as said, it is support at 75%. Fact of the matter is, is that the Democratic party, is a party of hypocrisy on social issues and socialist in its economic policies. Forget about the war, even though it is tied to another issue- foreign policy- which is very much important to my decisions for Obama, as well. For one, I do not like higher taxes. While I am a Bahamian, and it [American tax hikes] does not affect me directly, higher taxes means less money for people to spend in the Bahamas on vacation. And, higher taxes on investors making over $250k, means, possibly, less foreign direct investment to the Bahamas. That, my friends, is why I am supporting Obama at only 75%. Hopefully, the 'good vibes' and change in global conceptualizations on foreign policy from the US to other countries, would be a good thing, globally. The US has a dangerous foreign policy for itself and its allies and it has lost respect in the world. Hopefully, Obama can restore that and give confidence to the US explorer, en masse, even though they may have less to spend.
On another issue, and it is about race, the Democratic party cannot be serious, with their racist history, compared to the party of Lincoln and Nixon, President's who put teeth in any notion of national equality, to that of George Wallace and their current Pro-Tempiore, Sen. Robert Byrd. Give me a break! At least, if you want to be fair about it, let me keep my LOW taxes if you want to continue the stupid remnants of racist ideologies, in such a "discreet" manner. And, with that matter, the ascension of Obama's rise to political prominence, is borne out of the ashes and live remains of "race politics". The only reason that the Democrats found a black man to run for president before the GOP, is because they have, historically, more black people in their party--and it ain't because of their virtues on racial equality. It is because of their exploitation, through their white established elite promotion of guys like Jackson and Sharpton, who are race baiter's and way past their prime in regards to helping black people. They do more damage than they do help. Tawana Brawley and Jackson's illegitimate child, exposes their hypocrisy and dangerous racist rhetoric, individually. Furthermore, it is no secret black's have, at the same time having tremendous voting power, not been going to the polls as of late for the Democratic party and, rather, not voting or turning conservative--like me! So, Obama's rise to prominence, has more of a fabric of a highly calculated political risk, rather than any form of giving equality to black people and showing that, through his successes.
While I know full well, if I was a black American or a white columnist, I would be excoriated and put to public ridicule, for such ridiculous positions-or so it seems. But, we have to look at issues, objectively. And, that is as objective and as fair as you would get, considering the controlled "liberal" media!
More importantly, the Democrats are abortionists, at their core and make no bones about it. Roe vs. Wade is no laughing matter. I, as a black male, as the majority of the western African cultures are tied to their religion, take Roe vs. Wade as an egregious error of the civil rights 60's. While I feel that abortion, in the case of damage to the mother, is the only viable cause for abortion, the democrats, want that and the wholesale right, to abort up to the first year of birth--I really feel that way, when we factor in who supports partial birth abortion. And, by the way they lobby on the issue in totality, it does not sound far off. I find it so hypocritical that the party who screams for "human rights", would so careless and loose, in regards to children in the womb--the most defenseless of all of us!
So, while November 4th, means "Power to the People"...I will enjoy the moment, with guarded optimism about America and my future, in the Bahamas, as a result of consequences levied by the USA through policy, which affects little ol'e me, down here!
That's how I feel about it. Otherwise than that, I am happy for this historical moment in history, more importantly, western black history.
I support Barack Obama, 75%. While I make no reservations in saying that I am a, GASP, "Black Conservative", and, unashemedly support the Republican party on most issues- economic, poltical and social- I am, in Colin Powell fashion, supporting Obama, anyway!
While it may appear to be a racist move. And it is a racially motivated decision. Fact of the matter is, in its racist way, that is what America needs right now. Maybe this would put a new spin on the race argument in that racism, may not all the time be a bad thing. You can have good racism. Like Obama's case. The fact that he is black, lends itself to the sentiment that anyone, from anywhere, can one day become the President of the most powerful country in the world. Only in America! True indeed. This more than lifts the spirits of the American people, from all races, creeds and colours, through securing and solidifying in them the notion that you CAN sucede in the United States of America, despite the odds and despite the stranglehold elites have on Washington DC. After these last 3 years, in particular, America needs a national 'feel good' moment. McCain can't deliver that, I feel. And, more importantly, Obama ain't a dumb dude! He really can be the President of the USA--I place more confidence in him, than most of the other Presidential nominee's in the last 8 years, barring a Kerry and maybe Gore. Even though they were Democrats, they had an intellectualism that made them appear competent, and capable, over anyone in the race. But, being smart, does not necessarily mean you should be the President of the USofA--just ask both of them.
However, as said, it is support at 75%. Fact of the matter is, is that the Democratic party, is a party of hypocrisy on social issues and socialist in its economic policies. Forget about the war, even though it is tied to another issue- foreign policy- which is very much important to my decisions for Obama, as well. For one, I do not like higher taxes. While I am a Bahamian, and it [American tax hikes] does not affect me directly, higher taxes means less money for people to spend in the Bahamas on vacation. And, higher taxes on investors making over $250k, means, possibly, less foreign direct investment to the Bahamas. That, my friends, is why I am supporting Obama at only 75%. Hopefully, the 'good vibes' and change in global conceptualizations on foreign policy from the US to other countries, would be a good thing, globally. The US has a dangerous foreign policy for itself and its allies and it has lost respect in the world. Hopefully, Obama can restore that and give confidence to the US explorer, en masse, even though they may have less to spend.
On another issue, and it is about race, the Democratic party cannot be serious, with their racist history, compared to the party of Lincoln and Nixon, President's who put teeth in any notion of national equality, to that of George Wallace and their current Pro-Tempiore, Sen. Robert Byrd. Give me a break! At least, if you want to be fair about it, let me keep my LOW taxes if you want to continue the stupid remnants of racist ideologies, in such a "discreet" manner. And, with that matter, the ascension of Obama's rise to political prominence, is borne out of the ashes and live remains of "race politics". The only reason that the Democrats found a black man to run for president before the GOP, is because they have, historically, more black people in their party--and it ain't because of their virtues on racial equality. It is because of their exploitation, through their white established elite promotion of guys like Jackson and Sharpton, who are race baiter's and way past their prime in regards to helping black people. They do more damage than they do help. Tawana Brawley and Jackson's illegitimate child, exposes their hypocrisy and dangerous racist rhetoric, individually. Furthermore, it is no secret black's have, at the same time having tremendous voting power, not been going to the polls as of late for the Democratic party and, rather, not voting or turning conservative--like me! So, Obama's rise to prominence, has more of a fabric of a highly calculated political risk, rather than any form of giving equality to black people and showing that, through his successes.
While I know full well, if I was a black American or a white columnist, I would be excoriated and put to public ridicule, for such ridiculous positions-or so it seems. But, we have to look at issues, objectively. And, that is as objective and as fair as you would get, considering the controlled "liberal" media!
More importantly, the Democrats are abortionists, at their core and make no bones about it. Roe vs. Wade is no laughing matter. I, as a black male, as the majority of the western African cultures are tied to their religion, take Roe vs. Wade as an egregious error of the civil rights 60's. While I feel that abortion, in the case of damage to the mother, is the only viable cause for abortion, the democrats, want that and the wholesale right, to abort up to the first year of birth--I really feel that way, when we factor in who supports partial birth abortion. And, by the way they lobby on the issue in totality, it does not sound far off. I find it so hypocritical that the party who screams for "human rights", would so careless and loose, in regards to children in the womb--the most defenseless of all of us!
So, while November 4th, means "Power to the People"...I will enjoy the moment, with guarded optimism about America and my future, in the Bahamas, as a result of consequences levied by the USA through policy, which affects little ol'e me, down here!
That's how I feel about it. Otherwise than that, I am happy for this historical moment in history, more importantly, western black history.
Sunday, November 2, 2008
Hello from Global View Today!
Hello to all,
My first post. And, welcome to Global View Today! My name is Youri Aramin Kemp and I am the owner, or, the moderator or what ever they call a guy who bums a free blog from a system.
A little bit about myself;
I am a late 20's Bahamian male, residing in the Bahamas presently. I went to St. John's College HS and graduated in 1996. I worked for a heap of places, family business included, while I was starting community college at the Bahamas Baptist Community College. In 2003 I went off to St. Thomas University in Miami Florida, where I finished my B.A. degree in Psychology, cum laude, and with minors in Political Science and Philosophy. I was supposed to be a doctor- medicine- but chose Psychology as it sounded more appealing.
I then worked for the Four Seasons Resorts' and Casino in Great Exuma, before starting my tenure with the Bahamas Government, with the Department of Social Services, attached to the Urban Renewal division. I then took up studies at the London School of Economics and Political Science, on a full post graduate award scholarship in 2006, where I completed my MSc. in Comparative Politics and Markets, leaving behind any thoughts of being a Psychologist and making headway into international affairs and business, as I should have been in the first instance now that I look back at things. Working in business, is something I have a knack for and really, having worked in a family business as well as having worked for business for a period of time, especially one of the biggest businesses in the Bahamas- Restaurants' Bahamas Ltd and Abaco Market's. The latter, really was not a good business experience and hated it, and never want to think about it as much as I do other experiences.
In any event, before I left the UK, I worked for Penrose Financial as an intern and then with I.Q. Research as a Business Development/Operations Analyst.
I am currently working for the Inter-American Development Bank, as a consultant to the Multi-Lateral Investment Fund, working with the private sector in regards to providing consultancy on possible MIF grant assistance from the IADB- as well as providing operational and developmental consultancy, for said projects!
As for this blog, along with loving the Internet and international affairs, I am wanting to write some thoughts and opinions on world events--not entirely Caribbean and Latin American centric. However, if that comes across, then, take no offence as I have a special and obvious experience in the region.
My true passion is International Affairs and Economics, equally. Business is second nature and if I undertake studies again, it would be business oriented.
Enjoy this blog and my thoughts! Feel free to join!
Youri!
My first post. And, welcome to Global View Today! My name is Youri Aramin Kemp and I am the owner, or, the moderator or what ever they call a guy who bums a free blog from a system.
A little bit about myself;
I am a late 20's Bahamian male, residing in the Bahamas presently. I went to St. John's College HS and graduated in 1996. I worked for a heap of places, family business included, while I was starting community college at the Bahamas Baptist Community College. In 2003 I went off to St. Thomas University in Miami Florida, where I finished my B.A. degree in Psychology, cum laude, and with minors in Political Science and Philosophy. I was supposed to be a doctor- medicine- but chose Psychology as it sounded more appealing.
I then worked for the Four Seasons Resorts' and Casino in Great Exuma, before starting my tenure with the Bahamas Government, with the Department of Social Services, attached to the Urban Renewal division. I then took up studies at the London School of Economics and Political Science, on a full post graduate award scholarship in 2006, where I completed my MSc. in Comparative Politics and Markets, leaving behind any thoughts of being a Psychologist and making headway into international affairs and business, as I should have been in the first instance now that I look back at things. Working in business, is something I have a knack for and really, having worked in a family business as well as having worked for business for a period of time, especially one of the biggest businesses in the Bahamas- Restaurants' Bahamas Ltd and Abaco Market's. The latter, really was not a good business experience and hated it, and never want to think about it as much as I do other experiences.
In any event, before I left the UK, I worked for Penrose Financial as an intern and then with I.Q. Research as a Business Development/Operations Analyst.
I am currently working for the Inter-American Development Bank, as a consultant to the Multi-Lateral Investment Fund, working with the private sector in regards to providing consultancy on possible MIF grant assistance from the IADB- as well as providing operational and developmental consultancy, for said projects!
As for this blog, along with loving the Internet and international affairs, I am wanting to write some thoughts and opinions on world events--not entirely Caribbean and Latin American centric. However, if that comes across, then, take no offence as I have a special and obvious experience in the region.
My true passion is International Affairs and Economics, equally. Business is second nature and if I undertake studies again, it would be business oriented.
Enjoy this blog and my thoughts! Feel free to join!
Youri!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
