(Opinion) US Election 2012: Why Obama Is The Best Pick For The World

There are many reasons to elect both Barack Obama and Mitt Romney for the highest office in the land, but one firm reason to elect Obama for four more years as commander in chief is that as far as foreign policy is concerned, he has been close to flawless. While we haven’t seen much of mitt Romney abroad, however, the little cameo of his foreign policy tour gave pause for thought as he insulted allies by breaking “the golden rule of state visits and general etiquette when in home of others: do not, at all costs, insult the host” [1].

This is not to say that Mitt Romney is fit for office due to a couple of blunders in the press as many politicians have made the same mistakes, but in the international context defined by its quick pace and a perpetual state of flux, Mistakes like this among less friendly company can lead to international disputes.

Romney got a little taste of this when he  foolishly compared Israel’s economic development with Palestine’s and concluded that Israel economic dominance was down to ‘cultural’ superiority (completely overlooking decades of conflict) while controversially calling Jerusalem “the capital of Israel”, a major stick in the crawl of past negotiations  between Israel and Palestine leaders[2]. Palestinians response to Romney’s comments were scathing to say the least with a senior Palestinian official describing Romney’s comments as “a racist statement” and openly questioned Romney’s ‘knowledge’ of the “region and its people”[3].

While Romney was talking at a fundraising event, it reveals certain ignorance from Romney for not expecting the eventuality of his comments to reach the wider public as when a potential president speaks; the world pays attention due the United States having it fingers in so many pies. Mitt Romney doesn’t help own case as his views on  Russia threaten to set US-Russia relations back four years by recognising Russia as a major “geopolitical foe”[4].

The Obama administration have done some great work in thawing relations between the US and  Russia with regards to nuclear counter-proliferation  which, with a Romney presidency, would become frosty with some haste due to republicans favouring a missile defence shield in Europe, a policy  strongly opposed by former and current  Russian  president Vladimir Putin[5].

In sum, while Mitt Romney mistakes abroad are not going to harm him considering the bigger picture, it does reveals a truth that every country but the US is prepared to admit, a U.S. president amenable to negotiation is much better than a U.S president who isn’t.

---

[1] The carnage report, 2012, Mitt Romney negative favourable: no surprise, http://thecarnagereport.blogspot.co.uk/2012/08/opinion-mitt-romney-negative.html

[2] Quoted by H. Sherwood, 2012, Mitt Romney ‘providence’ comment in Israel outrage Palestinians, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/jul/30/mitt-romney-israel-economic-success

[3] Ibid

[4] R. T. Buchanan, 2012, Mitt Romney issues ‘inadmissable’ threat to Russia, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/mitt-romney/9512295/Mitt-Romney-issues-inadmissible-threat-to-Russia.html

[5] J. Marson and L. I. Alpert, 2012, Putting on U.S. vote: Obama ‘Genuine’, Romney ‘Mistaken’, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443589304577635113013597198.html

(Video) Julian Castro DNC Keynote Address: Home run to 2016?

(Video) Michelle Obama DNC Speech: Out the Ball Park

(Opinion) Sir Bobby Charlton England 2014 prediction: not the hardest prediction to make

There are many things wrong in football, most of it off field of play, but what is a major indicator of thing being out of order and place is when it ruling body places a nation that couldn’t make it past the quarterfinals (England) of euro 2012 over countries that did (Portugal and Italy) and places a very poor Greece national side one place ahead of five time world cup winning Brazil[1]. The FIFA world rankings have always been strange but none stranger than Sir Bobby Charlton obvious prediction that England will not win world cup 2014 in Brazil.

His observation to support his claim are the same reasons offered for every failure since England last moment of triumph in 1966 (particularly in last 20 years) such as the influx of foreign players and the lack of quality among the English ranks (almost inextricably linked to the influx of foreign players)[2]. He did throw a tiny morsel of hope citing conditions the England national team haven’t managed to reproduce since he was still playing stressing that if “the right group of players come together and stay together for a while and gel into a team, with the right manager, then perhaps it might happen, but I have to be honest and say it's a way off”[3].

Sir Bobby Charlton will have long wait for such conditions to come into fruition, a wait that unfortunately he is unlikely to survive. With a manager whose methods were innovative when Elvis was shopping for a demo deal and a team dominated by talented individuals who play like they missed a toilet break they really needed whenever against opposition south of FIFA top 100 countries and look like Sunday league amateurs when confronted by any occupants of its top 10.

In 2014, most team will blood a younger generation in a bid to win the 2014 world cup but trust England to blood the same of group who have for the most part choked when it really mattered. If Roy Hodgson is anything, he’s is consistent and will overlook new talent where is plenty, contrary to the common opinion by many football writer and pundit.

In sum, While Bobby Charlton prediction of England not winning the 2014 World Cup in Brazil will bring little in the way of disagreement. It does bring into focus the lack of quality in current England ranks and the lack of optimism in the general public over England’s prospects as England look set to add another fours of anguish to glory-famished England fans.

---

[1] FIFA, 2012, FiFA/Coca Cola World Ranking,

http://www.fifa.com/worldranking/rankingtable/index.html

[2] Guardian.co.uk, 2012, England will not win 2014 world cup, says Sir Bobby Charlton,  http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/sep/04/england-world-cup-bobby-charlton

[3] Ibid

(Opinion) Coalition government cabinet reshuffle: why is George Osborne still in office?

While the world is full of things that are beyond comprehension, George Osborne remaining as Chancellor of the Exchequer after the cabinet reshuffle has just joined the ranks. In the government’s recent cabinet reshuffle there has been some strange and expected changes such as the demotion of Ken Clarke (expected) and promotion of Jeremy Hunt to health secretary (strange) but why Prime Minster David Cameron has not thrown George Osborne a break and move him to a position closer to the PM office is very strange given the calls across the political spectrum to bench him or move him out of the treasury.

Perhaps it is because he believes in the programme currently in place at the treasury as he hasn’t failed to move out minsters who don’t agree him on key issues such as Kenneth Clarke and Justine Greening (the latter of which has sparked a major rift within the conservative party[1]) or ministers who have performed poorly such as Andrew Lansley. The fact that George Osborne remains in office reveals not only move to the right in the cabinet[2]   but a preference for loyalty over performance.

While George Osborne did not inherit an economy in great shape, his implementation of trademark conservative policies has done him and the coalition government in general no favours. George Osborne budgets have made large cuts in taxes, housing and education while presiding over Britain’s continuous slide into a double dip recession. However his performance is really the problem so much as his unpopularity with only 34% of the British thinks George Osborne is “doing a good job”[3].

The lack of change in the cabinet reshuffle, at least in positions that are key to the implementation of conservative policies, represents an assertion of a prime minster determined to get rid of the well earned tag of being government of that has only mastered the art of the u-turn. However as a result of this, the government’s main opposition to this assertion in policy will be the conservatives as the government is already receiving criticism for its changes in the cabinet. London Mayor Boris Johnson was quick to denounce the removal of Justine greening from the position of transport secretary due to her opposition to the addition of a third runway at Heathrow describing her as a “first rate Transport Secretary”[4].

In sum, David Cameron may be a conservative prime minster but has revealed his allegiance to his allies amenable to favoured policies rather to efficient and effective governance. While no one in politics expects a politician not to turn to his cronies in a time of need, for it to be done so openly for all to see is what gives reason for criticism. Geroge Osborne is a prime example of this criticism as he has performed poorly and is highly unpopular yet manages to stay in the cabinet despite his strengths is in political rather than economic strategy.   

---

[1] H. Siddique, 2012, Heathrow runway row: Cameron flies into storm of Tory criticism, http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/sep/05/heathrow-runway-row-cameron-tory

[2] P. Wintour and N. Watt, 2012,  David Cameron’s right turn in cabinet reshuffle, http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/sep/04/david-cameron-government-reshuffle-cabinet?intcmp=239

[3] P. Kellner, 2012,Budget hurts Tories but doesn’t help Labour,

http://yougov.co.uk/news/2012/03/23/budget-hurts-tories-doesnt-help-labour/

[4] Quoted by P. Wintour and N. Watts, 2012, David Cameron’s right turn in cabinet reshuffle, http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/sep/04/david-cameron-government-reshuffle-cabinet?intcmp=239