Virginia's Voice

Virginia and Obama

By

Varo Borja

An article in the Christian Science Monitor today cried hope for the Democratic presidential bid in the state of Virginia, an otherwise and aforetime staunch bastion of Republican sympathy. According to the article, Mr. Obama stands a good chance of winning Virginia in some polls, but according to one academic mentioned in the article, we are not to count Virginia’s electors before November 4. The article gave two opposing pictures: one of a pseudo-glorious McCain on stage with Hank Williams Jr. at a rally in Richmond. The other snapshot was of Mr. Obama kissing an elderly black lady at a hair salon somewhere in the state. I think this photo comparison does justice to both candidates, especially in regard to the slogans for their respective support centers: McCain’s, “victory centers” and Obama’s, “Campaign for Change” offices. Mr. McCain represents the tired old hegemony of the wealthy, white, landed gentry while Mr. Obama stands for a departure from traditional views and an enfranchisement of little old African American ladies who not only get their hair done on Saturdays, but topple whole socioeconomic structures, as was the case with Rosa Parks in the 1960’s. The state of Virginia has a long history of rebellion; some of the most prominent and levelheaded leaders of the American Revolution and the Civil War hailed from Virginia. Virginia also has a history of economic and racial disparity, coupled with the long arm of the Tidewater Elite and the old planter class. It remains to be seen what direction one of the greatest, and oldest, states in the Union will take on November 4th, but one thing is for certain: the result of Virginia’s vote will most likely determine who will reside on Pennsylvania Avenue in January.

Last Debate

Last Debate

By

Varo Borja

The Economist, on October 16, 2008 heralded the last presidential debate between Barack Obama and John McCain to be the finest so far. I must agree. For the most part, John McCain was on the offensive, jabbing, huffing, snorting, pouting and gouging at Mr. Obama for all he was worth. Mr. McCain knew he was desperate, and according to the polls, he still is. Mr. McCain brought up some valid points, but his body language and mental inferiority to Mr. Obama clouded what could otherwise be seen as a determined effort to close the gap in the polls. Mr. McCain made some very obvious blunders. He dwelt on petty issues, such as Mr. Obama’s association with Bill Ayers, and he seemed to be losing his dwindling acumen for the facts. Mr. McCain even went as far as to say that he would hire troops, just back from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, to teach high school students, all without undergoing the process to achieve a teaching license! With all due respect, Mr. McCain is more ready for the rest home than the White House, and I believe that this final debate will seal the victory for Mr. Obama and Joe Biden. Mr. Obama, throughout the debate, kept a cool head and steady pressure on John McCain, who seemed to be on the verge of physical assault upon both the mediator, Bob Schieffer, and Mr. Obama himself. Surely the American public sensed the desperation in Mr. McCain’s tone and body language, and much like the dying gurgle of the annual Thanksgiving turkey, Mr. McCain and Sarah Palin’s chances for a prolongation of the George W. Bush/Dick Cheney legacy have all but given up the ghost in favor of the economic Santa Claus: Barack Obama.

Obama and the Jewish Vote

Obama and the Jewish Vote

by

Varo Borja

Recently I was perusing an article entitled, “Obama’s Jews” by Bernard Avishai for Harper’s Magazine, and I found it very interesting the shift that has taken place among a large section of the American Jewish population. According to Mr. Avishai, the Jewish American voter was traditionally a Democrat, mainly because of FDR’s opposition to Nazi Germany and then later in the century, because of civil rights. Mr. Avishai goes on to state though, that a large bloc of the Jewish American population didn’t feel well served by the civil rights movement, especially in regards to the empowerment and economic liberation of, as Mr. Avishai says, “black toughs”. It goes without saying that Jewish American voters aren’t thrilled with the likes of Louis Farrahkan and Al Sharpton, and Mr. Avishai goes on to say that American Jews lampooned themselves as, “earning like Episcopalians and voting like Puerto Ricans”. Mr. Avishai notes, however, that the 1968 Israeli war brought about a shift in the Jewish vote to a more conservative stance, progressing even further with the 1973 Israeli/Egyptian war and culminating in the support, by a significant section of the American Jewish population, of Ronald Reagan. Mr. Avishai does note though that there has always been a large section of American Jews loyal to the Democratic party—he also says that neoconservative Zionists in the media and the political arena misrepresent the majority of American Jews. He goes on to state that what the American Jewish population is looking for is a movement, a grand cause, to revive their interest in liberal American politics. Mr. Avishai states, in a matter of fact manner, that Barack Obama can and will provide that impetus. The days of the Paul Wolfowitz’s and the William Kristol’s won’t soon come to an end however, and Mr. Obama will likely be rejected by the majority of Jews over 65, but I am glad to know that the progressive spirit hasn’t left the Jewish community. Even more so I will be glad when the trumpet of Zionism blares its last note. Zionism is one of the major setbacks for the Middle East and especially the Palestinian/Israeli peace movement, and parties such as the Israeli Likud and its malefactors will hopefully tire of their collective psychosis and relent for the good of us all.

No Cash Left Behind

NCLB: No Cash Left Behind

by

Varo Borja

I was perusing an article in Harper’s magazine the other day about the implementation of testing preparatory agencies in America’s schools. This article paid particular attention to the Kaplan testing agency, and was written by a current employee of that company. The article stated, in sum, that because of the No Child Left Behind act, test prep agencies are raking in an enormous amount of revenue, especially from Title I schools. Furthermore, the article stated that these test prep agencies don’t show results, other than inflated budgets and downtown Manhattan office suites. The author of the article, Jeremy Miller, also stated that many of the teacher s in the schools that he has worked with are indignant about having to implement curriculum bonuses such as the Kaplan method into their already time constrained schedules. The Kaplan method takes 40 hours of class time to complete, and many schools, once they have failed to meet NCLB criteria, have no choice but to employ agencies such as Kaplan at inflated rates, with little to show for their efforts. Mr. Miller states that the Kaplan company pays him at least 10,000 dollars more a year than the highest paid first year teachers in the nation make, and the total revenue from the Kaplan company, which is a part of the Washington Post group, has exceeded 2 billion dollars for the past fiscal year. Mr. Miller goes on to say that companies such as the Kaplan group focus solely on “correct answers” to tests such as the SAT, and slight or totally ignore education philosophies that focus their efforts on process learning, or to put it mildly, real education. Companies such as Kaplan are bilking the U.S. taxpayer of billions of dollars, and what does the average citizen have to show for it? Nothing other than the discarded Kaplan materials passed out in under-achieving schools that most of the students don’t even bother to read, let alone comprehend. The Kaplan company has been evasive at best when questioned by journalists as to its credibility and viability, but as long as the NCLB act stands, companies such as Kaplan and The Princeton Review (another spurious test prep agency) will continue to prosper, and Title I funds that could be spent on worthwhile programs and teacher salary increases will go down the proverbial toilet along with the future of many underprivileged children.

Parallels

Beauty and the Beast

by

Varo Borja

I am shocked, nay, astounded at the turn in the polls in the McCain/Palin ticket’s favor. I was reading an article in The Economist today which states:

A post-convention poll shows the two candidates nearly tied in perceptions of who would change Washington. Independents are moving towards Mr McCain despite Mr Obama’s strong advocacy of “change” in his campaign. The “enthusiasm” gap is closing, too: before, many voters told pollsters that they would vote for Mr McCain, but not happily. Now, many more are pleased with their pick. Again, Mrs Palin's elevation has much to do with this. At the Republican convention in St Paul, she generated such enthusiasm that there was jocular talk of flipping the ticket to put her at the top and Mr McCain in the vice-presidential slot.

What in God’s holy name are the American people thinking? The current crisis on Wall Street brings to mind another period in American history that I think should be adequately addressed: The Great Depression. At the time of the crash of 1929, a similar administration to the one currently in residence on Pennsylvania Avenue was in office. That administration, after a large, seething boom and the subsequent crash due to, much like today, easy credit, offered the cheap condolences to the American people that, and I quote, “I see nothing in the present situation that is either menacing or warrants pessimism…I have every confidence that there will be a revival of activity in the spring and that during the coming year the country will make steady progress” (Mitchell 31). That quote was taken from Andrew W. Mellon, then Secretary of the Treasury for the Hoover administration. Another interesting, contemporary quote from a member of the current administration reads thus:

I can count many, many times that people have said that America had lost its competitive edge. We had lost our competitive edge vis-a-vis Japan. We were a power that was over-stretched in the '80s. We were going to converge with the Soviet Union, by the way, in the 1970s. So there have been many premature sentences for America losing its competitive edge. We're going through a difficult time in the economy; adjustments to a number of circumstances, including in the housing markets and in the financial markets, that will work their way out (ontheissues.org).

This quote is all the more interesting in what Ms. Rice doesn’t say. She fails to mention any parallels between the current crisis and that of 1929. What she offers is smoke and mirrors, and the lingering effigy/myth of Ronald Reagan as a sword of truth wielding, Caucasian crusader with the red cross of the Republican templars blazoned upon his breast. Do the American people desire more of the same smoke and mirrors, cross brandishing (and burning), and slick, blindfolded tomfoolery that was offered us by the same party who brought us the Hoover, Bush, and God forbid, McCain/Palin administrations? Will the American people actually take time to digest some information that isn’t brought to them in savvy sound bites, O’Reilly factor diatribes, or “straight talk” ads denouncing the Democratic candidate as a man who would corrupt our kindergartners by bringing them sex education, when in fact Mr. Obama desired to prevent the molestation of children? It is time for the American people to wake up, to rise from their self-indulgent lethargy and assert their right to a better future. It is time for us to denounce the slick maneuverings of those who would hoodoo our country by appealing to our religious leanings, gender preferences, and fears of “axis of evil” terror. For the love of God, we must use reason, instead of emotion to decide who will govern our country for the next four years. If we don’t, then we cast our heritage to the wolves as we pretend, all too innocently, to be sheep led to pasture by a warmonger and a prom queen.

Works Cited

“Condoleeza Rice on Budget and Economy.” Ontheissues.org.

23 May 2008. CNBC. 15 September 2008.

http://www.ontheissues.org/2008/Condoleezza_Rice_Budget_+_Economy.htm

Mitchell, Broadus. Depression Decade: From New Era Through New Deal.

New York: Rhinehart and Co., 1947.

“The Palin Effect.” The Economist 16 September 2008.

Free Speech and the Sarah Palin Campaign

Free Speech and the Sarah Palin Campaign

by

Varo Borja

Today I was browsing through the Christian Science Monitor and I happened upon an article titled, “Don’t Be Swept Away By Hype in the Palin Campaign”. The author, Jerry Lanson, stated in a nutshell that it was the media’s job to, “unearth facts, not repeat myths.” I found this statement quite interesting with all the media glam surrounding the Republican VP nominee. Every time I’m in the grocery store line I glance at the tabloid headlines and see Sarah Palin’s face emblazoned upon the covers of these rags with sensational text surrounding her either smiling or scowling face. Apparently, the McCain campaign has lashed back at the “liberal media” for its preoccupation with Sarah Palin’s personal life. Good for him. What is not good for him and also for us, as Americans, is Sarah Palin’s record and qualifications. According to the Christian Science Monitor, Sarah Palin, “went to 5 schools in six years before graduating” and has flip flopped on very important issues to not only her state, but by proxy to the American people. Mr. Lanson of the Christian Science Monitor berates mass media for its sensationalist, sexist, and sometimes ignorant coverage of such important events in the history of this nation, and I for one would like to see, as Mr. Lanson says, more “tough (sic and) fair” reporting instead of “balanced” coverage of the presidential election. In this instant, “balance” can translate to a virtual smearing of both parties’ candidates in an attempt to garner sales revenue, instead of covering the tough, but sometimes unpopular issues such as what each candidate has done and most likely will do, if elected. I agree with Mr. Lanson wholeheartedly in that the catchword of the moment, CHANGE, needs not only to come to Washington, but to The Washington Post, The New York Times, People Magazine, and most unlikely, The National Enquirer. Truly enquiring minds want to know facts, not a plethora of should-be’s, could-be’s, and delectable morsels about the irrelevant, private aspects of the lives of public citizens.

Hockey Sticks, Ice Tiaras and Moose Dung

Sarah Palin as choice of Republican Party VP

by

Varo Borja

I was reading an article in The Economist today discussing the merits of John McCain’s choice of running mate, and I found the article to be quite in line with my thoughts on the issue. The article declared that John McCain’s choice was a major blunder, and gave statistics to back it up. According to the article, 31 % of undecided voters are less likely to vote for McCain now than they were a month ago, with only six percent of undecided voters more likely to swing for McCain now that Palin is his VP choice. Sarah Palin is an obnoxious, hockey stick waving, political dilettante who has neither the experience, nor the knowledge to pick up the reins of government should John McCain die an untimely death. McCain’s probability of an early death is quite substantial, even in a four year term, considering the fact that he is 72 years old and not in the best of health. Contrasted with Barack Obama’s choice of running mate, Sarah Palin pales in comparison. On foreign policy, domestic policy, or any other facet of American government, Joe Biden is a much better choice. Quite ironically, inexperience is one of the principle barbs that McCain has thrown at the Obama campaign. That barb is no longer in the Republican’s arsenal. Also, according to The Economist, John McCain is repeating mistakes made by the Bush administration, especially his choice of basing a candidate’s viability upon that candidate’s stand on the Roe v. Wade decision. The Bush administration, according to The Economist, almost without deviation put people in positions of power, regardless of their experience or qualifications, based upon said person’s stance on abortion. The Economist criticizes American politics from both sides of the spectrum based upon this criteria, and seemingly we as Americans remain the laughing stock of Europe because of the extremist views on abortion held in this country. Not only do opinions run to extremes on this issue, but a plurality of American voters are still willing to ignore much more important qualifications of their representatives in favor of said representatives’ respective pro-life or pro-choice positions. I, for one, am quite sick of the whole gambit, and would welcome a return to common sense government and pragmatic economic policies in this country in favor of a woman’s right, or lack thereof, to do whatever she would like with her uterus.

A Few Words

Thoughts on American Government

by

Varo Borja

The framers of the constitution certainly had their work cut out for them. I’m sure that with all their divisions, self-interested vanity, and the particular regional wants and needs that they brought to the table, there was much to be overcome to agree on a document that would work for the blossoming nation. I’m re-reading “The Americanization of Benjamin Franklin”, and I find his life to be the most fascinating of the founding fathers. Benjamin Franklin led a life devoted to the conquest of the almighty dollar, but he did much to improve himself and his faculties, especially in regards to practical wisdom. Mr. Franklin surely had much to do with the compromises that were reached during the constitutional deliberations, and I’m sure that even though he feared what might befall this nation from the British as well as what might happen because of the immorality of slavery, he valiantly upheld a basic American, if not universal virtue: the art of compromise. Compromise certainly didn’t make Mr. Franklin weak. Nor did it make the founding fathers weaker to put aside their self-interest and aggrandizement in favor of a workable solution. The willow tree is strong because it can bend with the breeze instead of being stiff as iron and breaking with the first gale of summer. This thought brings to mind the many avenues for compromise and diplomacy that we as a nation are faced with today. Should we talk to the Iranians, the Russians, the Venezuelans, and the Cubans, or should we just steel our faces and present an iron fist instead? These seem to be the questions of paramount importance to the American people in making their decisions for a future president. Perhaps we should take a lesson from Mr. Franklin and all men of wisdom and greatness, from Socrates forward, and bend with the breeze if we are to survive the storm.

Obama/Biden

Obama/Biden

by

Varo Borja

I find Barack Obama’s choice of a vice presidential candidate to be in line with the prevailing opinion that a candidate who is seeking to bring change, not only in the economic and international arenas, but also because of his race, must seek to allay certain fears of the electorate by choosing a man with not only experience, but pale skin. Joe Biden seems to have most of his ducks in a row. He certainly has experience, character, and charisma, but some of the comments he has made concerning Barack may hurt both of them in the long run. Also, Mr. Biden wasn’t too well received in his own bid for the presidency, so it remains to be seen how much he will bolster Barack’s campaign. I think that Barack made a wise choice in not selecting Hillary Clinton. In fact, according to the New York Times last week, he hadn’t ever seriously considered her. Apparently Ms. Clinton went too far in her fight to gain the nomination, and Mr. Obama is still nursing a grudge for her valiant, although somewhat belligerent, fight against him. Foreign policy will certainly play more of a role now that the situation in Georgia is in the forefront, and let us not forget that there are still two wars going on in the Middle East. Gas prices have taken a downturn, possibly with some assistance by certain supporters of the Republican party who would like to see their candidate not get crucified in November. Senator McCain certainly will have difficulties convincing the electorate that he is not bringing to the table more of the same (as the Bush administration), and God forbid that we go to war with Iran. Mr. Obama still has my vote, for the time being, but I would like to see him ramp up his stance on domestic issues and hold a steadier course in the foreign policy arena

We Will Be Heard

Article Summary from the Christian Science Monitor: African’s Newest Form of
Dissent: Blogs

By

Varo Borja


This article from the Christian Science Monitor discusses the use of blogging as a means for residents of Sub-Saharan African nations to voice their opinions on local, national, and regional events, and even voice dissent against their respective governments. The article opens with some comments from a Congolese blogger named Cedric Kalonji. Mr. Kalonji states, in regard to his blog, “I am Congolese and I talk about what is happening around me—the truth.” Mr. Kalonji’s blog is on congoblog.net, and is:


read by thousands of people around the world…it [sic] receives about 250 pageviews per day and has won international awards including the prestigious Best of Blogs award for the top French-language blog in 2007.


Mr. Kalonji states in the article that blogging provides a means of voicing his opinions about the state of the Congolese government that wouldn’t be afforded to him in any other manner. The article goes on to state that Bob LaGamma, director of a Washington-based advocacy group named Council for a Community of Democracies, supports these efforts by African bloggers as a means of exercising free speech. However, some of the recent African blogs go beyond free speech and delve into the realm of propaganda, such as the Niger rebel group, Movement of Nigeriens for Justice. Another rebel group makes its news known to the world on a blog found at makaila.over-blog.com, where posts are made on developments in the country of Chad, some of the posts calling for the deposition of the Chadian president, Idriss Deby. A tale of heroism and determination comes from the blogger responsible for the makaila.over-blog.com site, Makaila Nguebla, who sleeps next to his computer and takes phone calls and text messages twenty-four hours a day in support of the Chadian rebels. Mr. Nguebla states in the article that the Chadian government is, “not happy about his blog”, but he will post anything that, “serves to destabilize the regime.”


On a more disturbing note, Africa expert Leonard Vincent states that, “while expanding freedom of speech in Africa is important, some opposition and rebel blogs are taking it [blogging] too far.” Mr. Vincent states that, in particular, the political blogs in Sub-Saharan Africa publish, “whatever they want—full of libel, defamation, violence, [and] sometimes very graphic images.” However, Mr. Vincent states that the African governments, for the time being, have much more important issues at hand, and haven’t really begun to suppress blogs of dissent in the region. He does state that as the internet becomes a ubiquitous feature of African daily life, as it has in the west, the repressive regimes of the Sub-Saharan region will become increasingly more intolerant and belligerent towards these bloggers, who with enough pageviews per day, could lend a hand in either the elimination of tyranny or the continuance of the same in the Sub-Saharan region.


For further analysis, I have chosen to compare the situation of the bloggers in Sub-Saharan Africa to the arguments of Stephen D. Krasner and Kimberly Weir in their article on the survival of the sovereign state titled, “Will State Sovereignty Survive Globalism?”. Stephen D. Krasner states in “Will State Sovereignty Survive Globalism?” that, “states are better able to respond [to threats to their sovereignty] than in the past.” This is a double-sided statement, because, according to the Christian Science Monitor article, the Sub-Saharan states are aware of African bloggers, but aren’t taking any real steps to suppress them. Mr. Krasner also states that, “the impact of the global media on political authority (the so-called CNN effect) pales in comparison to the havoc that followed the invention of the printing press.” Is the lack of action on the part of the African authorities a sign that the bloggers of the Sub-Saharan region aren’t causing enough “havoc” to merit a crackdown? According to the article, the authorities were completely aware of Mr. Nguebla’s blog, but had only threatened him with censorship; a mild form of punishment considering the usual savagery displayed by Sub-Saharan leaders. Or are the African authorities afraid of global repercussions for the suppression of the dissenting blogs, like Mr. Nguebla’s, because of their worldwide readerships? According to Kimberly Weir’s argument (that state sovereignty will not survive Globalism) in “Will State Sovereignty Survive Globalism?”, “communications have been chipping away at the state since the printing press was invented.” Ms. Weir also states that the proliferation of technology, especially of the internet, will continue to threaten state sovereignty because technology puts power in the hands of the erstwhile disenfranchised and powerless denizens of nations like Chad and Zimbabwe, and makes the suppression of political dissent, within a sovereign state, more difficult. The question is then, is blogging chipping away at state sovereignty enough to merit widespread suppression? This too is a double-sided query, answerable depending on the time frame in question. In the Christian Science Monitor article, Mr. Leonard Vincent states that the issue of dissenting blogs in Sub-Saharan Africa, for the time being, is a minor issue, but in the long term, he expects to see the widespread suppression of dissenting blogs there, in full accordance with the characters of Sub-Saharan rulers. This statement lends credence to both arguments, with the lion’s share going to Ms. Weir, who in the long term, will most certainly be proved correct.


My thoughts on this issue, as a blogger myself, are in support of free speech everywhere, but with the responsibility of telling the truth. I do not agree with the practice of needless defamation, or the proliferation of violent scenes across the web where children may view them carelessly. However, I visited the two blogs mentioned in the article (m-n-j.blogspot.com and makaila.over-blog.com) and found them to be quite harmless, if a little too politically charged. I read very little French, but the m-n-j.blogspot.com blog featured mostly name calling, red-ink propaganda, and harmless pictures of freedom fighters arrayed in battle garb. The makaila.over-blog.com blog seemed to me more intelligent and better put together, and featured what seemed to be insightful, concise articles and commentary on the state of the Chadian government. I found nothing in either blog that was objectionable, let alone reprehensible, or unworthy to be viewed by anyone surfing the web. I also feel that, with the current tyrannies in existence in the Sub-Saharan region, political defamation, in most cases, would be an inappropriate term when connected with the rulers of Chad, Niger, and Zimbabwe. I believe, like Malcolm X and the Chadian blogger Makaila Nguebla, that political freedom, equality, and justice, must be attained for all people by “any means necessary”, and I applaud the determined efforts of Mr. Nguebla and his associates throughout Sub-Saharan Africa for their non-violent, expressive means of achieving those goals.

Zimbabwe

Article Summary and Analysis: Coming to a Crunch: From The Economist March 18, 2008

by

Varo Borja

This article, from The Economist March 18 edition, discusses the coming parliamentary and presidential elections in Zimbabwe on March 29. The article begins with a warning: Don’t re-elect Robert Mugabe. Mr. Mugabe, through extreme leftist disbursements of land and capital to his cronies, violent suppression of dissenting voices, and outright corruption, has almost bankrupted the sovreign state of Zimbabwe since it won its independence from British control in 1980. The 84-year-old Mr. Mugabe, instead of retiring and handing over power to his nominal successor, Mr. Emmerson Mnangagwa, is scheming for continued control over the state of Zimbabwe by his tired methods of nepotism, subversion, bribery, and threatened violence. However, Mr. Mugabe faces at least one viable rival in the person of Mr. Morgan Tsvangirai, and a lesser, but perhaps more capable opponent in Mr. Simba Makoni, “a former finance minister whom many of Zimbabwe's black and shrinking white professional middle class see as the decent and competent face of ZANU-PF” (the mostly corrupt ruling party in Zimbabwe). Mr. Mugabe has already begun to rig the elections and, according to the article,

The media are hugely stacked against the opposition, which is rarely given even a cursorily polite airing by the all-state-run radio and television services. The election commission is chaired by a Mugabe man, a former general. The registrar-general, another loyalist, presides over an electoral roll that is notoriously unreliable and incomplete, and contains thousands of dead people whose votes are expected to go to the president. Unless voting is extended beyond one day, many town-dwellers may be unable to cast their ballots, because there are too few urban polling stations. The diaspora, some 2m-3m mostly disenchanted Zimbabweans, is barred from voting.

Also, many Zimbabweans see Mr. Makoni as entering the election too late to make a difference, with some Zimbabweans going as far as to label him an agent of Mr. Mugabe’s, sent to disrupt the rallying party of Mr. Tsvangirai, much like the Nader vote has done and will do in the American election of 2008. Also, Mr. Tsvangirai is seen by many to talk loudly and carry a big stick, but to have no real plan for bolstering the economy should he win on March 29. According to the article, the economy is certainly the biggest contributing factor in the discontent of most Zimbabweans, with astronomical inflation rates of 100,000 % yearly, and an almost worthless Zimbabwean dollar weighing in at 30,000 to 1 U.S. dollar. According to the article, in most sections of the country basic necessities such as maize, sugar, and salt in are in desperately low supply, with most the of the nation subsisting on either remittances from exiled Zimbabweans or UN relief. Astonishingly, the Zimbabwean unemployment rate is at around 80%, mainly because of the nepotism and greed displayed by the Mugabe administration. The article ends with a sobering, if gloomy thought that even if Mr. Makoni or Mr. Tsvangirai win the presidential election on March 29, it may be too late for the sinking ship that is the nation of Zimbabwe to recover from its long, corrupt and violent lethargy.

For further analysis of this article I’ve chosen to relate this piece to the machinations of the International Criminal Court. According to the article,

Mr Makoni has called for a government of national unity, bringing together both wings of the MDC and the supposedly acceptable bits of ZANU-PF, along with his own team. Mr Mugabe would be allowed to go into a dignified retirement, and not be sent to The Hague for crimes against humanity.

Would this action, or lack of action, be just? The International Criminal Court is in place to try those accused of “crimes against humanity” and other global offences. Mr Mugabe clearly meets this criterion through his ruining of the Zimbabwean economy, his underhanded political dealings and overt theft of private property, and his various violent crimes against the citizens of Zimbabwe. The manifesto for the ICC also states that there must be “repeat offences” to merit an inquiry by the ICC, but Mr. Mugabe has been in power for over 20 years and repeatedly violated the statutes set up by the court. Perhaps this lack of action by the ICC is in accordance with John R. Bolton’s argument that the court is both ineffective and hindered by the same bureaucratic straight-jacket that the UN and other multi-national organizations wear.
If this is the case, perhaps the United States should further decline membership in the ICC, in accordance with (ugh) President Bush’s former refusals.

My thoughts on this article are myriad in scope. How can such a tyrannical, unjust, violent and oppressive regime be allowed to continue in power with the means available to depose it? Obviously, the ICC isn’t fulfilling its obligation to enforce global justice. The United States is stretched to the hilt in Iraq and Afghanistan, and sub-Saharan Africa is in such turmoil as to be ineffective in combating injustice. From an idealistic standpoint, I can’t help but look with chagrin at the inaction of the rest of the world on this issue. However, I am ever more becoming a realist in the realm of global politics. Perhaps Zimbabweans and the rest of sub-Saharan Africa aren’t ready for peace, justice, prosperity and equality. Obviously, the imperial pursuits of European nations have played havoc with Africa and Africans in the past. Mr. Mugabe and his lot sought to completely cast off the shackles of their former European masters, but what have they gained? Chaos, cruelty, starvation, and bankruptcy seem to permeate the African landscape. It seems that only time and evolution will heal the hurts of the sub-Saharan African nations. In the meantime, I suppose it is up to the UN and the rest of the civilized world to act as midwife for sub-Saharan pre-adolescent growing pains.

Iowa Caucus: Dems Seek Hispanic Votes

Thoughts on the Iowa Caucus

by

Varo Borja

This article, by Nafeesa Sayeed, for the Associated Press, discusses the meager efforts being conducted by the Democratic Party to provide outreach to potential Hispanic voters in the State of Iowa. The Iowa caucus, the first to be held in the Nation’s presidential race and certainly the most hyped by the media, could be a good indicator of which candidate will win the nomination, and is therefore a much coveted prize by all the candidates. However, according to the article, not much is being done by any of the candidates to reach out to the growing Hispanic population in Iowa, other than a few half-hearted efforts at conferences and some appointments made on would-be presidential staffs. The top three contenders (Barack Obama, Hillary Rodham Clinton, and Bill Richardson) have apparently made attempts at outreach to the Hispanic population in Iowa, but according to sources inside the state, such as Jesse Martinez, (an Iowa resident working with the Eastern Iowa Coalition for Comprehensive Immigration Reform) not much is being done to reach out to the people who matter most: the voters. However, the Democrats face an imposing task, because the Hispanic population is dispersed throughout the state in small communities that are tough to reach in the aggregate. Also, Hispanics make up only about 4 percent of the population of Iowa, making them a less appealing target, but still a sizeable demographic. The Hispanic population has risen 39 percent in the last few years, and with the presidential contenders competing at very tight margins, any advantage that can be won will be well worth the effort undergone to achieve it. However, much more must be done if the present candidates are to win the laurels afforded by a large Hispanic turnout, starting with better education for previously unregistered Hispanic voters and a more aggressive outreach strategy that is able to reach this demographic before time runs out in November.

Fight To Survive

Wanna get the scoop on what's really going on Iraq? Check out Fight to Survive. This most excellent blog has been put together by some of the real eye witnesses to the "war on terror". These guys lay it all out there in black and white, and present a striking contrast to the lard assed, boozed up, flag waving "Country" singers toting big fat paychecks and little or no dignity or credibility. This blog is first rate in content as well as composition. I'm honored to be able to list it on my page. You'll find it, once again, under News on the right.

American Short Timer

I've read several posts from this man's blog, and he makes a lot of sense. Shame that war can make a man so cynical, but hey, I'm cynical and I've only had a few shots fired in anger in my direction. Mainly from jilted trailer brides with bottles of Jack in their non-gun wielding hands. Check him out. If he doesn't change the way you see the world, he'll at least avert your gaze for a moment from the newest big bosomed blonde trying to sell you a fluglebinder. Edit: I couldn't get the link to work, so I went ahead and put his blog under news. You'll find it to the right in the links section. peace.

The Fool

I am a moderate. Most of the time. When the Right gives a tax cut to the progeny of the Wal Mart dynasty, I cringe. When the left makes it un pc for me to say the word God in my own church, I want to vomit. What is going on? Is it really the end of days? Are the Republicans and the Democrats two heads of the same dragon? Is the media really liberal, or is it just a vehicle for more sales, more fear, and more control? Where is the middle ground? Where is the sanity? Where is my grandfather who got a bayonet in the stomach during WW2 and retired making 5 dollars and fifty cents an hour and all the time smiling like the cheshire cat? Why can't a public school teacher get elected president? I pray for serenity and I'm still white bread house nigger scum in the grand spectacle of the race to get more, more, more for your dollar and scrape enough change together to put Phillip Morris's great grandchildren through cotillion with my brown lung butter and the cancerous sores forming at the corners of my frowning face. I watched C span last night sheerly for the sedating effect of the pedant discoursing on the intelligence community that he's envious of for not putting enough text about subversive elements in Guatemala on the internet and who the fuck really cares anyway? I tell you who cares. The thousands of soldiers hunkered down in Babylon bleeding for us and dying for us and procuring another pint of oil and prestige for the bloated elephantitis head of state that doesn't give two shits about even serving a day in the service of his country in a war zone that has long segued into peace because we decided to leave well enough the hell alone. Peace? Upside down broken cross standing for sodomy, sloth, and the egoistic crusade of a generation of failed marriages, spiritual bankruptcy and the trouncing of every piece of character that this nation retained at one time. Fuck Bill Clinton. Fuck W. Fuck the whole lot of self serving, self interested glory hounds hot on the trail of stock tips and trips to the Caymans where they hide what really matters to the majority. Money. Cash rules everything around me and never forget it, cause if you do you're liable. Lawyers and the reek of ambulance exhaust. Can you tell I'm a gen Xer? Can you tell I don't have a lot of faith in the future? Will my generation really be able to turn the red tide of fate or will we make the same mistakes as our parents? Gimme the Star Spangled Banner anyday over Lil John and Tommy Lee and the rest of the no talent sequels to American Idol prepackaged for the consumption of obese welfare mothers and chronic masturbatory teens bringing up the rear and ready to procreate with the devil for fifteen minutes on the boob tube. My father, My father, why hast thou forsaken us?

--VB