Snoopers Charter Vetoed

Civil liberties groups breathed a sigh of relief yesterday after news broke that Nick Clegg would be effectively vetoing the "snoopers charter". The bill proposed by Home Secretary Theresa May would have given sweeping new powers to the police and intelligence community. It would allow them to log the online data of everyone in the UK, recording what websites we visit, when we visited them, who we message etc.! Many people were horrified by the proposal calling it an affront to civil liberties, Conservative MP Dominic Raab called it "Orwellian".  The refusal of Labour, Lib Dems and many Conservative MPs meant the proposal was dead in the water.

Nick Clegg has rejected the allegation that this was another example of the rift between the two governing parties, pointing out that the proposal had never been in the Coalition Agreement. Yet with the three year anniversary just around the corner, we already can see massive fault-lines between the two parties. Some have actually predicted that the coalition will not last until the next election in 2015! We'll have to wait and see.

Theresa May's bill has been shot down
source: www.guardian.co.uk

EU Removes Burma Sanctions

The European Union has decided to lift most sanctions previously placed on Myanmar/Burma. The decision has been described as premature by some but the move is supported by democracy leader, Aung San Suu Kyi. The decision was made in the backdrop of increasing sectarian tensions and violence, particularly in the west of Burma. In western Burma the minority Muslim community has been attacked which has resulted in the deaths of hundreds and displacement of over 125,000! The violence began last summer and has started to escalate out of control. A recent Human Rights Watch report accused the Burmese government of ethnic cleansing due to its inability to help the Muslims. It may come as a surprise to you that it is Buddhists who are leading the violence! In the West people tend to portray Buddhists as good people who never partake in violence. It would appear that all religions have violent elements to them.

Currently Burma is slowly moving from military dictatorship to a democracy. In 2012 Aung San Suu Kyi's party, National League for Democracy, made significant gains in by-elections held in summer. Yet the government still retains an iron fist on power. Together the military and the government party (Union Solidarity and Development Party) control 322 of the 440 seats in the lower house, called the Pyithu Hluttaw. In the upper house, called the Amyotha Hluttaw the government has 185 of the 224 seats. With a presidential election in 2015, Burma may be in for rapid change. Let's hope that they can handle it!

Violence has spread throughout the country.
source: www.bbc.co.uk

2014 Gubernatorial Races

In 2010 Republicans swept to power in the states, making a net gain of six governorships. This means Republicans have a natural disadvantage as they have to defend more governorships. Of the 22 governorships controlled by Republicans, nine of them were won by Obama twice. On the other hands the Democrats only control one governorship in a state won by Romney and McCain. Of the remaining races 13 Republicans are up for election in McCain/Romney states, 12 Democrats are up for election in Obama states and there is one independent, Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island.

Although 2014 is looking bright for Democrats, they shouldn’t get their hopes up. How people vote in federal elections can be very different to how they vote in state elections. So here I will outlay all the states and what ways they are likely to go.

2014 Gubernatorial Races - Republicans Defending

Alabama:

The solidly Republican state will likely elect Republican Robert Bentley to another term in office.

Alaska:

Another solidly Republican state unlikely to elect a Democrat. A PPP poll in February showed incumbent Sean Parnell beating all likely Democratic opponents by large margins. Parnell has not declared if he will run or not.

Arizona:

Governor Jan Brewer is not eligible to seek election to a second consecutive full term, but is trying to see how she can get around the ban. Arizona will probably remain Republican regardless, but Richard Carmona, who ran for Senate in 2012 could put up a worthy challenge.

Florida:

This will be one of the most hotly contested races in the country as incumbent governor Rick Scott is quite popular. Charlie Crist, now a Democrat, will likely attempt a challenge for the governorship. All polling done so far shows Crist beating Scott by wide margins.

Georgia:

With Democrats eyeing up Georgia’s open Senate seat, the governorship will likely stay in the hands of Nathan Deal.

Idaho:

The Democrats have little hope against Butch Otter in 2014. He is a popular Republican in a very red state.

Iowa:

Democrats will have their eye firmly on the open Senate seat. If Republicans manage to flip the seat then it could hand the senate to Republicans! This takes the heat off Governor Terry Branstad if he decides to run.

Kansas:

If Governor Sam Brownback decides to run then it will be a cake walk for Republicans. If Brownback doesn’t run, it will still be a cake walk. Kansas is seriously Republican.

Maine:

Along with Florida, Maine could be one of the most interesting races of 2014. The unpopular Paul LePage was elected in 2010 in a competitive three way race. A repeat of that could mean that he might eke out a victory. If it’s only a two way race then LePage would probably lose.

Michigan:

Michigan is another Republican controlled state likely to go blue. Governor Rick Snyder is deeply unpopular with a disapproval rating of 54%! According to PPP, Snyder is beaten by every Democrat they polled on.

Nebraska:

Although incumbent governor, Dave Heineman, is ineligible for re-election, things are unlikely to turn blue in this red state.

Nevada:

Incumbent governor, Brian Sandoval, is highly likely to be re-elected according to current polling.

New Mexico:

Despite the highly Democratic nature of the state, New Mexico looks likely to re-elect Susana Martinez according to polling!

Ohio:

Although it is looking OK for John Kasich at the moment, Ohio could become a battleground as the election draws closer.

Oklahoma:

It would be a massive surprise if Oklahoma turned blue in 2014.

Pennsylvania:

Governor Tom Corbett’s position is looking worse by the day with Democrats beating him by large margins in a recent PPP poll. Pennsylvania is looking increasingly likely to turn blue in 2014.

South Carolina:

It may surprise you but in 2014, South Carolina could be a close race! Nikki Haley is not popular in South Carolina and a PPP poll in December showed her actually losing to Democrat Vincent Sheheen! Yet there were a good few people who were undecided, so this race will still be difficult for Democrats.

South Dakota:

There’s little question that Republicans will keep South Dakota red in the 2014 race, regardless of what incumbent Dennis Daugaard decides to do. Democrats are much more focused on the Senate seat which will be vacated by Tim Johnson. As in Iowa, control of the SD senate seat could determine who controls the Senate.

Tennessee:

Republican Bill Halsam will almost certainly win re-election in 2014.

Texas:

Governor Rick Perry could run again in 2014 and would be favoured to win another term.

Wisconsin:

Unless he really screws up, Scott Walker will likely win re-election. In 2012 Democrats tried to recall him but he managed to cling on, winning 52.3% of the vote.

Wyoming:

The Democrats have no hope of winning extremely red Wyoming.

2014 Gubernatorial Elections - Democrats Defending

Arkansas:

Despite the Republican tide of 2010, incumbent Democrat governor Mike Beebe sailed to re-election winning 64.4% of the vote. Unfortunately for Democrats, Beebe is term limited, leaving this race wide open. There has been very little polling done so far, but what has been done suggests a Republican pickup thanks to Asa Hutchinson.

California:

Incumbent governor Jerry Brown is eligible to run for re-election in California. So far no polling has been done but it is likely that the California governorship will remain Democratic.

Colorado:

John Hickenlooper is the incumbent governor and has very good approval ratings (54/33) and a bid for re-election would likely be a success.

Connecticut:

Despite poor approval ratings at the beginning of his term in office, Dan Malloy has rebounded in popularity. A PPP poll in November 2012 found him leading a potential Republican challenger by 11 points.

Hawaii:

Democrats are highly likely to keep the state Democratic, regardless of whether Neil Abercrombie decides to run.

Illinois:

Despite the Democratic nature of this state, Illinois could end up upsetting the Democrats in 2014. In a poll from November, declared Republican Kirk Dillard beats incumbent Pat Quinn by seven points. All is not lost for Democrats though, Lisa Madigan, who is favoured to win the Democratic nomination beats Dillard by nine points.

Maryland:

The state will have an open race as Martin O’Malley is term limited. No polling also makes this race difficult to predict, yet due to the Democratic nature of the state, I would put Maryland into the likely Democrat category.

Massachusetts:

Deval Patrick has decided not to run for a third term, which could place Massachusetts in the situation of possibly going Republican! Scott Brown, the former US Senator, could enter the race and really challenge any Democrat who steps forward to run.

Minnesota:

Mark Dayton has declared his intention to run for re-election and will likely succeed. PPP polled him against four Republican potential candidates and beat them all by over 20 points!

New Hampshire:

The incumbent Democrat Maggie Hassan beat Republican Ovide Lamontagne by 12 points in 2012, which puts her in a good position to win in 2014. Yet it is way too early in her term to be able to assess her likeliness to win in 2014.

New York:

Andrew Cuomo is the highly popular incumbent governor and is almost certain to win the governorship in 2014.

Oregon:

The incumbent Democrat John Kitzhaber currently beats all potential challengers in polls done so far and would likely win re-election if he decides to run.

Vermont:

Currently the incumbent Peter Shumlin is likely to win, especially as the most competent Republican, Jim Douglas, has ruled out running.

2014 Gubernatorial Elections - Prediction

Democrats are probably going to make gains in 2014, winning back some of the governorships that they lost in 2010. Yet there is one problems for Democrats, the elections come in the midst of Obama’s second term and historically, the party that controls the presidency, under-performs in the mid-term elections. It’s really too early to start making concrete predictions on many of the races, but I do think I know which ones will prove the most interesting: Arkansas, Illinois, Florida, Maine, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania and South Carolina. For Illinois and South Carolina, the interesting bit could just be the primary elections, if the Democrats in Illinois and Republicans in South Carolina replace their incumbent with a more popular candidate, the races could fade from interest.

Governorships Democrats Defending
Governorships Republicans Defending
Introduction to 2014 Gubernatorial Elections

The Boston Bombings

Two bombs exploded near the finish line of the Boston Marathon injuring dozens and killing three. I want to make this post primarily because so much misinformation has been spread across the internet since the bombs detonated. Here are a few facts:

·         The fire at the JFK Presidential Library was caused by an electrical fault, not a bomb.

·         Nobody is under arrest or in custody at the time of writing, contrary to what the New York Post claims in regards to a Saudi citizen.

·         The picture of a young girl who was supposedly running for Sandy Hook children and got killed is fake. The picture was taken last year in Virginia when she was on a 5K fun run. An eight year old was tragically killed but he was a male bystander.

·         The two other devices investigated by police are now thought not to have been bombs.

·         No group or individual has declared themselves responsible for the attack as of yet.

The motive of the attack is a complete mystery at the moment so all we can do is speculate. After all it has been less than 24hrs since the bombs went off, it took several days to find out all the facts about Sandy Hook. There are a number of reasons that have been floated by people and politicians alike, naturally Islamists were the first to be questioned, also in consideration are right wing extremists or a nut job like Adam Lanza, the Newtown shooter. You can speculate all you like but it will do more harm than good. Wait for the facts, stay safe, stay calm and carry on.

North Korea Vs. Iran

In the past couple of years we have heard a lot about the nuclear programmes in North Korea and Iran, yet the public in the West only seems to take Iran seriously. Here are some similarities and differences between the two countries.

Both countries have issued serious threats to nearby countries. Iran has threatened to wipe Israel off the map, North Korea has threatened to turn South Korea into a "sea of fire".

Both nations have active nuclear programmes.

Both are dictatorships.

Both countries suppress free speech.

Both countries are currently under sanctions from the UN.

Both countries frequently threaten the West.

Only one has tested nuclear weapons - North Korea

Only one has nuclear weapons - North Korea

Only one has 'declared' war on its sworn enemy - North Korea

As you can see both countries are very similar in how they approach the world, yet only one of them is taken seriously by the Western Public. Despite the fact that we take North Korea less seriously, it has the more advanced nuclear programme! So why do we take Iran more seriously than North Korea? I will try and help you out.

One of the primary reasons is the culture of islamophobia in the West, particularly in the United States. The failed states, such as Afghanistan, have been breeding terrorists for decades that attacked Westerners living in the area. After Al Qaeda turned global in 2001, the fear the West had for Muslims went sky high causing many people to fear Muslims. The fact that Iran is a Muslim country fuels peoples' fears and means we take Iran more seriously. There is also the more rational fear that if Iran develops nuclear weapons, and the weapons fall into the hands of Al Qaeda, then the risk to the West would be massive.

Iran and North Korea both know that if they attack the USA, or its allies, with nuclear weapons, then the USA will retaliate with nuclear weapons, annihilating their countries. This is another reason why people are more fearful of a nuclear Iran; Iran is fun by Muslim fundamentalists and the fear is that they might decide that annihilation is worth it for 'Jihad'. On the other hand the regime in North Korea is the most important thing to North Koreans, annihilation is the last thing they want.

The last reason we take North Korea less seriously than Iran is about the image portrayed by both nations and their leaders. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is older and looks more serious than the podgy, young Kim Jong-Un. North Korean propaganda also makes North Korea look like a joke, the little we hear about them is simply hilarious. According to North Korean propaganda, Jim Il-Sung (the original dictator) had a "supernatural" birth,  Jim Jong-Il was a worldwide fashion trend setter and people loved him globally and he invented the hamburger. Less is propaganda is known about Kim Jong-Un, apart from the 'fact' that he found a unicorn lair. Seriously. And North Korea wonders why we won't take them seriously.

Thatcher - The Good, The Bad and the Ugly

Baroness Margaret Thatcher died yesterday aged 87 in the Ritz Hotel, London. With her passing ends the life of a woman who defined British politics for generations to come. That certainly does not mean that she was unanimously liked, certainly not in Britain; she was a bit like Marmite, you either loved her or you loathed her, there wasn’t much of an in-between.

The moment Thatcher took power in 1979 she was faced with serious domestic challenges. She had to deal with the aftermath of the Winter of Discontent and the all-powerful unions who had caused it. Her early years in office were marked by recession, unemployment and high inflation. As a result her popularity dipped to the lowest ever recorded for a British Prime Minister and helped fuel protests and riots against her iron grip. She was sure to lose election in 1983! Yet the signs of an economic recovery, division and a lack of trust in the Labour Party and the Falkland’s War all contributed to her victory. Yet more challenges were waiting for her, most famously the looming conflict with the miner’s union and its leader, Arthur Scargill. The dispute resulted in a massive victory for Thatcher and the power of unions in Britain was decimated. Thatcher engineered the closing of mines, including many that were profitable, which resulted in thousands of jobs being lost and whole communities being devastated. These mines (which were overwhelmingly in the north) were practically the only source of income for many towns and as a result they simply ran out of money. Thatcher is remembered as a tyrant in these areas.

Thatcher’s foreign policy was (and is) more popular than her domestic policy. The Falkland’s War is still considered to have been highly successful and the right thing to do. Her support for Mikhail Gorbachev in the USSR and support for Croatia and Slovenia are seen with hindsight as good policy. Although it wasn’t always so rosy, her refusal to take part in the sanctions against apartheid South Africa and dismissal of the African National Congress as a terrorist organisation did not play well with most people.

Thatcher is not remembered fondly by the nationalist community in Northern Ireland, her refusal to concede concessions to the hunger strikers was met with anger by the community. It took the death of Bobby Sands and nine others to get her to budge, all the while terrorist activity and violence increased. Already a natural target for the Provisional Irish Republican Army (Provisional IRA), this made it all worse, culminating in the assassination attempt at the Conservative Party Conference in 1984. She escaped unharmed.

The major component of ‘Thatcherism’ was always privatisation. Throughout her time in office she privatised numerous state owned corporations. By the time she was ousted in 1990 she had privatised gas, water and electricity as well as British Petroleum (BP), British Telecom (BT) and British Steel. By the end of her time she also supported privatisation of the railways, although that was undertaken by her successor, John Major. The only major one left was the NHS, the sacred cow of British politics. She also massively deregulated the financial sector which is a large part of why London overtook New York as the pre-eminent financial city. Her policy is also a large part of why we had the terrible crash of 2007/2008. Her tax cuts for the wealthy remain in place, but unpopular, when she entered office, the top rate of tax was 83%, which was reduced to 40% by the time she left. Yet her most controversial decision surrounding tax turned out to be the cause of her downfall. The poll tax. The old council tax system was based on the value of your home, the more value had, the more you paid. She didn’t like this system and wanted to replace it with a flat rate, one which everyone paid the same. This was met with outrage across the country as people took to the streets in protest and riots broke out in many cities. The idea that the rich and the poor should pay the same was not a popular one with the British public.

Overall Thatcher’s legacy divides people, she moved the country on a track down the path of Conservatism, a path we are still on. Her dealings with taxes, unions and public corporations can be seen today. Unions are losing power, the top rate of tax is 40% and none of her privatisations have been reversed.  

Obama's Not So Progressive Budget

This coming week will mark the beginning of the budget debate in the United States and will be fought as feistily as ever. Obama is expected to release his budget proposal later this week but we already know much of what will be contained in it. Unfortunately it is not particularly progressive, it will contain the following:

Ø  It is expected to reduce the deficit by $1.8 trillion in 10 years.

Ø  Change the structure of social security (including chained CPI)

Ø  Means testing parts of Medicare

Ø  $400 billion in healthcare savings/cuts

Ø  $200 billion from other areas

But don’t fret though as they are including some more progressive ideas:

Ø  Expanding access to pre-K

Ø  Set limits for tax preferred benefits for the wealthy

This has been met with shock and dismay by many liberals in the United States. The most painful part for Democrats is the chained CPI in social security. In ways Social Security to Democrats is much like the NHS to Labour, it is a sacred cow which must never be cut. What chained CPI actually does is cut the benefits to seniors collecting it. Currently the average 85 year old receives $1,200 a month, the chained CPI will result in a cut of $1,000 per annum! For the average 65 year old the cut will be $650. The budget also cuts benefits for veterans, the proposed changes will mean that a vet who was disabled in a war and is currently 30 will lose $1,400 pa by the time they are 45 years old, $2,300 pa by the time they are 55 years old and $3,200 pa by the time they are 65 years old! This has really got liberals up in arms, there is even talk of primarying Democrats who vote for the changes to social security.

There is a real chance that this can be defeated by Congress for several reasons. The Social Security changes are so offensive to many Democrats that many will vote against it, this could cause a real upset in the Senate where Democrats have control. For liberals this is where Republican’s hatred of Obama could come in handy; many Republicans in the House and Senate have such a vociferous hatred for Obama that they tend to oppose anything he proposes. If a significant proportion of Democrats and Republicans in either the House or Senate were to oppose the President’s deal, it could be defeated. 

North Korea Determined to Start War

In 1962 the world braced itself for nuclear war, it was looking increasingly likely that the USA and USSR would be unable to come to an agreement over what to do about the Caribbean nation of Cuba. Thankfully the crisis was ended with a peace deal, not nuclear war, but the event has generally been noted by historians as the one occasion when nuclear war was a real possibility.  It would appear that Kim Jong-Un is trying to add 2013 as the next year when nuclear war could be a realistic outcome. In the past few months he has been ratcheting up tensions with the US and South Korea over a multitude of issues. The latest escalation came when the North released the following statement:

“We formally inform the White House and Pentagon that the ever-escalating US hostile policy towards the DPRK [North Korea] and its reckless nuclear threat will be smashed by the strong will of all the united service personnel and people and cutting-edge smaller, lighter and diversified nuclear strike… and that the merciless operation of its revolutionary armed forces in this regard has been finally examined and ratified.”

In response to the declaration the US has begun moving nuclear defences to Guam, a US territory in the Pacific Ocean. Unfortunately this has been taken as an act of aggression by North Korea which seems hell bent on re-starting the Korean War, taking millions of people with it.

Already North Korea has declared a state of war with South Korea, although no direct actions have yet taken place. It has further antagonised the south by threatening to re-start a project to great weapons grade nuclear material and promised to turn Seoul into a “sea of fire”. Its actions earlier this year by performing another nuclear test have not helped the situation.

But will all this actually lead to a war? It’s difficult to say, it could be that Jong-Un is trying to solidify power by proving to the military leaders that he can be tough on the West. The difficulty is that Jong-Un could heighten tensions so much that war becomes inevitable, that the US or South Korea launch a pre-emptive strike out of pure fear. Very little is known about the Orwellian society so attempting to predict an outcome is difficult, will the north go to war? I would like to think not, but I’m not going to try and predict what will happen next.