Follow the bouncing ball

dollar.jpgDollar at record low against euro: “It seems now that the longer-term investors like pension funds and perhaps monetary authorities are either hedging their dollar risk or moving assets out of the United States. It looks like the dollar has further to fall…”

You can check out the historical data using Oanda’s FXGraph applet: choose “from USD“, “to EUR“, “since 6 Nov 1996“. Note the trend over the last four years, and extrapolate….

What will this mean for the US economy? Unless the budget and current account deficits are slashed, the probable consequences are rising interest rates, rising inflation, a depressed housing market, and recession. We’ve seen this before: it’s called stagflation. Welcome to the 1970s. Even the oil prices look familiar….

(Via the BBC.)

"Talk more, shoot less"? What a quaint idea….

Iraqis Say U.S. Should Talk More, Shoot Less: Iraq’s Deputy Foreign Minister Hamid al-Bayati said the insurgency was partly due to mistakes Bush made earlier. “Using force that kills civilians on a large scale is a mistake. The logic of occupation must end. Bush’s main mistake was not to let an Iraqi provisional government take power after Saddam was toppled,” he said. “The resistance operations were seen coming as soon as the United States kept acting as an occupier.”

(Via Yahoo!.)

Culture war?

From Andrew Sullivan: “A MANDATE FOR CULTURE WAR: That’s Bill Bennett’s conclusion. He won’t be the only one. What we’re seeing, I think, is a huge fundamentalist Christian revival in this country, a religious movement that is now explicitly political as well. […] But the intensity of the passion, and the inherently totalist nature of religiously motivated politics means deep social conflict if we are not careful. Our safety valve must be federalism. We have to live and let live. As blue states become more secular, and red states become less so, the only alternative to a national religious war is to allow different states to pursue different options.”

UPDATE: Amy Sullivan has a different take on this: “the “huge fundamentalist Christian revival” took place about thirty years ago, not last month, and it has always been explictly political”. Worth reading, but flawed. Yes, the revival took place years ago, and Reagan and Bush Snr. courted the religious right and then ignored them. Dubya did pretty much the same in 2000. This is the first time that religious wedge issues have been so nakedly and cynically exploited as part of a GOTV effort, and it coincides with (1) the election of a new crop of Republican congressmen who are as rabid as Newt’s crowd were but are explicitly religious in their allegiance, and (2) the likely opening of 2-4 Supreme slots. I think that it is going to be different this time.

Monday morning quarterbacking

Masood has been pointing people at an interesting piece in Counterpunch by Alexander Cockburn and Jeffrey St. Clair, criticizing Kerry’s campaign strategy and tactics for the loss. While the brute facts of the argument are incontrovertible – the role of religion and homosexuality, and Kerry’s difficulty in establishing a clear distinction between him and Bush on Iraq, outsourcing, and so forth – I’m not sure that those factors were decisive. Look at it another way: in spite of all of those handicaps, Kerry came extremely close to unseating an incumbent president who should have been a shoo-in. What could he have done differently? (No, he couldn’t have tacked left.)
As Cockburn and St.Clair point out, the choice of VP was probably decisive:
Edwards added absolutely nothing to the ticket. At least Dan Quayle held Indiana back in 1988 and 2002. No one state in the south went into Kerry’s column. Gore did better in Florida and West Virginia. Dick Gephardt would certainly have brought the Democratic ticket Missouri and probably Iowa and hence the White House.
Gephardt could have worked, but he has a lot of baggage. I actually think that the best choice might have been Wes Clark, in order to hammer Bush on the issue of military incompetence. Unlike Kerry or Edwards, Clark could have invoked Abu Ghraib as a moral catastrophe for which heads ought to roll, and done so without being accused of betraying the troops.

Convenient fictions

Baghdad Burning: “Everyone here knows Abu Mussab Al-Zarqawi isn’t in Falloojeh. He isn’t anywhere, as far as anyone can tell. He’s like the WMD: surrender your weapons or else we’ll attack. Now that the damage is done, it is discovered that there were no weapons. It will be the same with Zarqawi. We laugh here when we hear one of our new politicians discuss him. He’s even better than the WMD- he has legs. As soon as the debacle in Falloojeh is over, Zarqawi will just move conveniently to Iran, Syria or even North Korea.”

At this point, I don’t know if Allawi is using Bush or if Bush is using Allawi. And the truly depressing thing is that I don’t think it matters. The dead, the maimed, and the orphans won’t discriminate. Meanwhile, please read River’s blog and spare a thought for the people of Falloojeh.

Lessons from November 2

Independent of the actual result, one clear message to the rest of the world is that the US is simply incompetent at running elections. After 2000 one might have expected some improvement, but no: if anything it’s worse. A crazy patchwork of laws (whatever happened to “Equal protection”?) selectively applied; untested and unreliable machines; incompetent poll workers; running out of ballots; insufficient polling places. See this IHT report on overseas’ observers for one example, or the E-Voting Experts blog for more. And don’t tell me that it only affects a few voters, or that it’s an inevitable side-effect of the size of the country. Japan, UK, Germany, France… all make this stuff work at comparable scale with virtually none of these problems. When a city provides two voting machines for 1100 registered voters (Columbus), or halves the number of polling places in the face of significantly increased registration, that isn’t a “scaling problem”: it’s either incompetence or (worse) a triumph of partisanship over democratic principles. The ends don’t justify the means.
Listen guys, it may have been cute to spend a couple of hundred years pretending that you were just a bunch of agrarian sovereign mini-states, like Swiss cantons, but it’s time to grow up. Uniform laws. Uniform standards. Voting systems that work. Guaranteed provision of enough ballots, machines, and polling places for ALL, not just the people you expect/want to turn up. Absentee ballots sent out on time, not three days before the election. And voting spread over Saturday and Sunday – what’s the rush? (Although mandating an 11 day waiting period for counting provisional ballots is also ridiculous.) Try taking a few lessons from Venezuela, for instance. Or Serbia.
America may be the world’s second largest democracy, but don’t hold yourselves up as a role model.

Huh?

Israeli Woman Motorists Dance Nude in India?: “India’s northwestern state of Rajasthan has punished local officials after residents complained a group of Israeli women motorists had danced in the nude near a town revered by Hindus, a newspaper reported on Wednesday.”

Why punish the “local officials”, I wonder? /me shakes head

Fulbright got it right

From Tuesday’s Guardian: “Stuck in the middle” by David Clark:
Almost four decades ago, during the Vietnam war, the great liberal, Senator J William Fulbright, captured more eloquently than any recent commentary what is at stake in today’s US presidential election. There were, he said, two Americas: “One is generous and humane, the other narrowly egotistical; one is self-critical, the other self-righteous; one is sensible, the other romantic; one is good humoured, the other solemn; one is inquiring, the other pontificating; one is moderate, the other filled with passionate intensity; one is judicious and the other arrogant in the use of great power.”

It’s time to choose.