Musings of a modern guy

Hillary Clinton gave it all she could, but she was just unable to stand against the fresh wave that was manifested in the form of a newbie Senator, Barack Obama. One considers that Hillary would have made a better President (in spite of her moving to pure populism over the fuel tax removal issue); she has made her position known on the different areas that affect the US, and her positions are mostly thought through positions on issues that are impossible to solve easily. But she has tried to avoid grand-standing, and one needs to give her that. Now Obama, he seems like a person who could bring society together (does anybody really believe that polarised Democrats and Republicans will come together even for a person holier than Obama ?), somebody who addresses the belief of so many educated and young Americans that they need a person who is not tainted with the politics as usual. And so, the people with Hillary keep on leaving her as they see her as a sinking ship:

Veteran Democratic Party figure George McGovern dropped his support for Hillary Clinton on Wednesday and endorsed Barack Obama, saying the Illinois senator seemed certain to win the party’s nomination for the November presidential election. McGovern, 85, said he told Clinton’s husband, former President Bill Clinton, of his surprise decision in a telephone call, and that Clinton made no attempt to change his mind.
With Obama within 200 delegates of wrapping up the nomination, said, “All the mathematics seem to be on his side.” “Barack Obama has waged a very effective campaign. He’s an unusually capable and talented man. I didn’t frankly know him when I endorsed Hillary last October,” he said.

This will continue as time progresses; it is almost mathematically impossible for Hillary to catch up in the elected delegates number, and when the super-delegates who are either on Clinton’s side or uncommitted ones eventually see the time to vote, an increasing number will get swayed by the push from the Obama side to respect the popular elected delegate mandate. This is an election that Hillary Clinton has lost; what she needs to do is to maybe work out how she can stay in the race and become a Vice-President.

President Musharraf must be smiling, nay, positively laughing. For all their political life, the parties of Nawaz Sharif (Pakistan Muslim Leadue -N) and the Pakistan People’s Party of Asif Ali Zardari have been political opponents. They came together just a few months ago when neither of them got a majority in the last elections, and they needed to deny President Musharraf the political instability; hence they made the grand decision to form a coalition. Pakistan took a sigh of relief at this prospect, and welcomes the change of having a somewhat stable parliament. However, as of now, this seems to be a mirage:

Former prime minister Nawaz Sharif said ministers from his party will resign from their posts on Tuesday over differences regarding the reinstatement of judges sacked by President Pervez Musharraf. However, he said his party would not take any decision that would strengthen what he called a “dictatorship” under Musharraf. “We will not be part of any conspiracy aimed at strengthening dictatorships,” he said.
Sharif expressed disappointment after the weekend talks with Zardari failed to resolve the deadlock. He said he made sincere efforts but the deadlock could not be broken.

It was somewhat clear from the beginning that Nawaz Sharif would push for the reinstatement of judges who were kicked out by Musharraf when he had again taken over by dismissing the constitution in the second half of last year. He was the one who had the least to lose; President Musharraf is under the threat of his election as President being challenged and maybe set aside by the previous Chief Justice. Zardari faces the risk of the law that saved him from corruption trials being rules as unlawful.
For some time it seemed that Zardari would back down and let the judges come back to the Court (none of this had resolved the logistical issues of what would happen to the existing judges on the Supreme Court); but it seems like he finally decided that he could not take the risk of his amnesty being removed - he would need the shield of that amnesty once he decides that he wants to be the Prime Minister.

For a number of years now, Lebanon has been suffering the impact of civil war. In the 80’s, there was a wide-spread war that had turned Beirut into a shell town, although the current war is a different war. This is a fight for power between the various neighboring powers seeking to get their influence and power into a better position in this strategically important nation. Lebanon is suffering from a fight between the 2 divisions within Islam - the Shia and the Sunni. Iran has been the leader in terms of a large nation with Shia control (and projects major influence in the other majority Shia nation - Iraq). Iran supplies the Hezbollah movement with financial and armed support and in turn the movement helps project Iranian & Syrian influence in the region. On the other side is the US backed forces of Saad Hariri who have more international support and support from the Sunni powers in the region, including Saudi Arabia. This battle for influence is now manifesting itself in bitter armed fight in Lebanon and in the capital city of Beirut:

Iranian- and Syrian-backed Shiite opposition gunmen seized control of several Beirut neighborhoods from Sunni foes loyal to the U.S.-backed government on Friday. In a sign of the collapse of the pro-government forces in the face of the onslaught by the Shiite Hezbollah and Amal groups in the Lebanese capital’s Muslim sector, the TV station of top Sunni politician Saad Hariri’s Future Movement went off the air and the offices of its affiliated al-Mustaqbal newspaper on the edge of the city was set afire by opposition gunmen, according to TV footage and Hezbollah.
The scenes were a grim reminder of Lebanon’s devastating 1975-90 civil war in which 150,000 were killed and parts of the city wrecked. Factions threw up roadblocks and checkpoints dividing Beirut into sectarian enclaves. “We entered Karakol Druse. There is no Jumblatt and no Hariri here,” a Shiite gunman told Associated Press Television News, referring to the top Sunni leader and his ally, Druse leader Walid Jumblatt. The military has sought to stay out of the feuding, fearing a repeat of its breakup in the long civil war that wracked this country — home to rival communities of Sunni and Shiite Muslims, various Christian sects and Druse.

The problem with this conflict is that there are so many influences that it is difficult to tamp things down, and things could swiftly go from bad to worse. Syria has never backed away from trying to project its influence in Lebanon, and has carried out clandestine bombings and killings of figures opposed to its influence in Lebanon, including the former Primer Minister who was killed in 2005.

For 2 candidates who represent almost the same wing of the Democratic Party, 2 candidates who have almost always voted for the same bills in the Senate, one can expect that the positions of the 2 candidates on almost all matters would be the same (and it has almost been the same - the difference is more about the style and whether Obama is a new wave as opposed to Clinton who represents more of the same). However, politics and the pressure of remaining behind Obama on the delegates count is forcing Hillary to get more desperate and adopt stands that are illogical such as the push to temporarily have a gas tax holiday:

Clinton shot first, using Obama’s opposition to her gas tax holiday plan as a vehicle to smack him for doing nothing to help Americans hammered by soaring prices. “What has happened to Barack Obama?” the Clinton spot asks. “He is attacking Hillary’s plan to give you a break on gas prices because he doesn’t have one.”
“More of the same, old negative politics,” his ad rips. “Her attacks do nothing but harm. … We need honest answers. And a President we can trust.” In Merrillville, Ind., Clinton insisted her summer-long tax gift was a way to help people now, while she pursues a long-range energy plan - a plan she broadened to include an all-out attack on oil-producing countries.

This proposal by Hillary is more of a political stunt. The amount of money that would be available to an average family as saving would be negligible, and the message that all Americans should try to reduce their gas usage will be totally lost. America needs to reduce its gas usage and dependence on foreign oil rather than tell citizens that they can continue with their same massive oil consumption and patronage of gas-guzzler vehicles. Obama has the far more principled policy in this regard.

Oil prices have been steadily moving up for the past couple of years, and even with the overall low rate of taxes on gasoline in the United States (as compared to the most countries where the taxes are much higher), gas prices are now upwards of $3.5 per gallon, and the pain is very high for a country where the car is the primary means of transport for a majority of its citizens.
Previously, the sales figures for gas-guzzling SUV’s and pickup trucks were high, high enough to worry most people trying to reduce the oil consumption in the US, and most so for environmentalists and global warming experts who worried about the higher rate of oil consumption in the transport sector. There has always been an alternative, even in the previous oil shocks of 1973 and 1980, people moved towards more fuel-efficient smaller cars; but this shift was only temporary and people would move back to the gas guzzlers when oil moved down (and hence the overall success of the hummer, a vehicle that drinks gasoline rather than running on it). However, recent trends seem to indicate that the sales of smaller fuel-efficient cars is on the rise:

America’s love affair with sports utility vehicles (SUVs) and pick-up trucks is finally over. The gas-guzzlers that ply the country’s freeways and clog its city streets and parking lots are falling victim to ever-rising petrol prices, rather than concern about the country’s oversized carbon footprint. The fall-off in sales is dramatic however.
With petrol now selling for almost $4 (£2) a gallon, consumers are trading in their Humvees and Ford Explorers so fast that for the first time, one in five cars sold in the US is now a compact or subcompact. In another first, sales of six-cylinder vehicles were bypassed by smaller four-cylinder, mostly Japanese, cars in April. According to George Pipas, of Ford, sales of passenger cars have exceeded trucks and SUVs for the first time in at least 20 years and pick-ups are now on the list of the top 10 vehicles being traded in for every small car in the industry. Large cars and SUVs have long been status symbols for Americans, but as economic reality bites, car showrooms are being turned over to fuel-efficient vehicles.

This is overall good news for the United States. A lot of the problems plaguing the US, whether economically or in the geo-political space are due to its dependence on foreign oil. If this trend continues, it will have the additional benefit of making smaller cars more acceptable, and hence maybe make a small dent in the overall gasoline production.

During the last crackdown by President Musharraf late last year, rattled by a judiciary that was seemingly not subservient enough to him, the dictator General had removed a number of judges of the Pakistani Supreme Court and moved them to house arrest. The authority under which this had been done ? Well, he was the President and had just done a second coup, and so what he said and wrote was law ! He was fearful that the judges would not be scare of him and order his election to be unlawful.
With the election of the 2 main opposition parties and their combined might being a majority in the assembly, it was always expected that they would bring back the sacked judges, with the only constraint being that the PPP chief Asif Ali Zardari would be a bit hesitant due to the judges picking up the earlier amnesty ordinance for consideration and for whether it is lawful or not. However, with Nawaz Sharif sticking to his demand, the case for getting the judges back had to become a reality:

The decision of Pakistan’s new ruling coalition to restore the judges sacked by President Pervez Musharraf last November has sparked both excitement and apprehension. But there are also fears that this may start a confrontation between the ruling alliance and President Musharraf, who is armed with powers to sack the government.
Some observers say the incumbent chief justice - who stands to lose his position if the sacked chief justice, Iftikhar Chaudhry, is reinstated - may be motivated to issue such injunction. Judges whose current seniority would be affected in the event of the restoration would also have a similar motive, they say.

This is a very sticky issue. What happens to the judges who remained on the court and who fear being pushed into the background if these judges are re-instated ? They will lose out badly if such a thing comes to happen. Further, it is not clear whether President Musharraf will remain quiet, or will use all his influence to prevent such a thing from happening.