The Battle Begins (Sept.-Oct.2008)

A few years ago, I was absent-mindedly watching the regional news on television when I was suddenly rooted to the spot, overcome by feelings of surprise, elation and excitement. I had to share the moment with someone else and, in my rush to get my husband to see what was rapidly reducing me to a babbling state of incoherence, I knocked over the cup of tea, caught my jumper sleeve on the door handle and grazed my knee on the coffee table.

I had never seen anyone I actually knew on television before, and there, being interviewed large as life in front of me, was the owner of the local furniture shop who had sold us our dining room chairs only the week before. I was so thrilled, anyone would have thought that I was on the box. Television suddenly gave her superhuman status and, having actually spoken to her, that somehow made us part of the unfolding scene. For days I could talk of nothing else.

This event returned to mind when I received a Christmas card some months later from a girlfriend I hadn't seen in seven years. Her brief note said simply, "Saw you on television again recently and told everybody I knew you." Having seen me as a panel guest on a programme, she had reacted in exactly the same way, wanting to share vicariously in the brief moment of glory.

Seeing Barack Obama making his magnificent speech last week, surrounded by so many enthusiastic people who liked him, believed in him and was anxious for him to win, brought these experiences back vividly to mind. I felt I was there in the midst of those people, sharing that wonderful moment. It also reinforced the key part RECOGNITION plays in success in modern times because of our media age. If it is not confirmed by the public or the media in some way, success is not really defined in social terms. Having that recognition in all aspects of our lives is essential and it is clear that Barack now has his in abundance.

In fact, television holds the key to why we push ourselves to the limit to achieve our ambitions. It is the overwhelming desire to be somebody, if only for 60 seconds of our lives. It also explains why some people would do anything to appear 'on the box', especially on reality programmes. Yet this sort of fleeting success is not the real answer to what we individually seek because it seldom lasts as long as we would wish. What each of us secretly craves, yet do not often admit, comes in three interrelated forms: recognition, respect and, ultimately, reward, the key elements of SUCCESS.

RECOGNITION
Though we do routine acts for their intrinsic enjoyment and value, the real thrill of carrying out a particular task or favour comes from hearing someone else say how 'good' or 'brilliant' it was. These words of appreciation – of genuine acknowledgement for our efforts – provide the essential oils to keep the light of motivation burning and to grease the wheels of endeavour. When we do not hear them we become doubtful and fretful of our ability to perform well and begin to question our own competence. We also become watchful of others, resentful of their success and inevitably critical and envious. This is not surprising because nothing kills the human spirit quicker than to be repeatedly ignored, constantly passed over and criticised when one is trying so hard.

We all like to feel our efforts are being recognised and, if there appears to be favourites who seem to be always getting the perks, and the attention, we tend to agonise, become uncooperative and low in self-esteem. We begin to wonder why we are treated differently and failure to get honest answers will negatively affect our perspective and production. External differences (like race, gender, disability) also become the focus as possible causes of the injustice. There are countless companies with increasingly low output because of gross mismanagement of staff. This is because all those words of encouragement are the vital forms of recognition we need to affirm our worth. When they are missing, our motivation goes with them too.

We are all too conscious of extrovert employees who are skilled at attracting attention to themselves, the chief executive officers of industry - and politicians - who can award themselves big pay rises, or middle managers who are perceived to have done wonderful things, while the ordinary worker is overlooked in the rush for recognition. Yet the smallest faulty cog in the largest machine can bring the whole thing to a halt, a fact which often underlies substandard production through the mismanagement of human resources. We feel wanted when our contributions seem to count and are encouraged. When this is not the case, our opinion of ourself becomes questionable and our self-esteem falls dramatically. We are likely to minimise former achievements and to believe everyone else is 'better' and more deserving.

Barack Obama started out with a quiet dream, known only to him. Then, with encouragement from family and friends, he began to put that vision before the public. If his dream hadn't been recognised by the very people he was trying to convince (sponsors and supporters), he would not have even got off the starting blocks. He would have been a footnote in American history. But people could visualise his dream of change and his sincerity in wanting to realise it, and slowly began to recognise the possibility of his vision and his ability to deliver. Once that public recognition came (just before he won Ohio) he was on his way. That is why critics who belittle his phenomenal achievement do him a great disservice because he was up against one of the best in the field, Hillary Clinton, with so many factors against him, not least public scepticism, yet still outclassed her in the end.

Changing Negative Labels
Without recognition, no matter how small, we have no value in our own eyes. Many adults believe they are 'failures' because somewhere in their childhood they have been repeatedly told they are either 'stupid', 'not as clever' as their brother/sister, or they're 'heading for disaster' , etc. They internalise these negative comments and, in time, come to believe them because no one else has told them otherwise. Even as adults, they often find it difficult to change these negative labels. With few positive reference points around them where it matters, they lack the confidence to believe in themselves, regardless of their potential.

Recognition has to be continuous too. We feel wanted when our contributions seem to matter and we are encouraged to actually make such efforts. If not, we immediately feel inadequate because we begin to doubt that we are as good as we used to be. That is why many people are often less bothered about a pay rise than getting the recognition they believe they deserve. For them, the extra pay may relieve financial burdens or improve their standard of living, but it is not a true barometer of their worth, neither does it affirm their value and competence in the eyes of peers who may also be getting the same pay. Without adequate recognition, once the novelty of the pay rise passes, they would be back to having feelings of self-doubt and low morale. Thus wherever pay is given the highest priority, there will also be very anxious individuals who often use the demand for extra money to compensate for their chronic lack of recognition.

True recognition comes in the form of gradual self-discovery followed by the acknowledgement of peers and superiors. Given the recognition, Barack Obama has been on his own journey of self-discovery, tapping his inner resources to reveal the awesome leader he is. Thus, to be widely recognised for who we are and what we have achieved is the ultimate in public accolade because it often reinforces what we believe of ourself, as Obama has displayed in an amazing manner. It raises our status above others, making us potential role models to be emulated.

Recognition through acknowledgement then precedes the next success stage, respect.

If you go to Barack Obama's website, you will see an immediate page which sends you directly to places to make a donation. No politicking, no underhand political message, no preamble or irrelevant chat, just a simple directive to offer help while providing the easiest way to do it. Compare that to John McCain's website where a few carefully placed political messages interfere with the donations McCain is supposed to be encouraging. That is the main difference between these two opponents: Barack Obama is a true statesman of the highest order, keeping himself above the hustings at tragic times like these, , and genuinely caring for the plight of others,, and genuinely caring for the plight of others, while John McCain is a simple political hustler, grabbing every occasion to promote himself, even at other's expense, and never failing to keep reminding the country of his POW status in the process. Yet he is not, and never will be, the only POW who sacrificed for his country.

In fact, while Mccain has been busy with photo opportunities packing provisions, Obama has been quietly motivating people at this stressful time, without any cameras or fanfare. Here is an audio segment of such a speech. In front of an audience of 14,000 in Milwaukee, this man showed why he will be the president. The beautifully apt metaphor of people's lives compared to a storm is just phenomenal to give the real picture of how real, basic American lives are coping.

Enjoy!

All across America there are quiet storms taking place. There are lives of quiet desperation. People who need just a little bit of help. Now, Americans are a self-reliant people, we’re an independent people. We don’t like asking somebody else to do what we can do ourselves but you know what we understand is that every once in a while somebody’s going to get knocked down.

Every once in a while somebody’s going to go through some hard times. When we least expect it tragedy may strike. And what has always made this country great is the understanding that we rise and fall as one nation, that values and family, community and neighborhood, they have to express themselves in our government. Those are national values. Those are values that we all subscribe to. And so that the spirit that we extend today and in the days to come as we monitor what happens on the Gulf that’s the spirit that we’ve got to carry with us each and every day. That’s the spirit that we need in our own homes and it’s the spirit that we need in the White House. And that’s why I’m running for president of the United States of America.

Because if there’s a poor child out there, that’s my child. If there’s a senior that’s having trouble, that’s my grandparent. If there’s a guy who’s lost his job, that’s my brother. If there’s a woman out there without healthcare, that’s my sister. Those are the values that built this country. Those are the values we are fighting for.

Indeed! What a guy to have as a leader. The personal empathy is awesome.

A longer excerpt and more comments here: Obama on Gustav

I have to say that this is such a cool album of pictures, they show why the Obamas would be a wonderful First Family. The main things that are pretty obvious in this compilation is the togetherness, the love and mutual respect between them.

There is a lot of positivity here to savour and it definitely makes a difference from the relentless negativity usually associated with politics. One cannot doubt the simplicity and sincerity of Michelle and Barack from this album.

A Celebration

Enjoy!

Did Sarah Palin Really Say Those Racist and Sexist Words?

A waitress called Lucille, who does not wish her last name quoted, said she overheard the the governor use the derogatory words when talking to her friends over a meal and they all joined in the ribaldry. It is easy to say things when we believe no one will hear us, that it won't matter to too many people, that we are too insignificant to be noticed or we are above other people and so entitled to say anything we feel. But considering the diversity of America, the country's history of racism, and the fact that Sarah Palin is herself a woman and could now possibly be a President of the United States, this latest 'smear', 'quote', 'comment', or whatever it is supposed to be, needs to be investigated thoroughly to assess its veracity or laid to rest.

Leadership is about credibility, respect and authority which combine in a powerful way to reinforce trust. If the public cannot trust a VP nominee in her views and comments, how can they trust her promises and intentions? All of these crucial aspects would now be in serious jeopardy if she made such a dastardly statement off the cuff. It would reveal her own stark biases and the lack of respect she herself accords to minorities and her own gender. It would be a terrible indictment of how she views such diversity.

Above all, one cannot assume this is a 'smear' or a lie just because Palin is the new VP nominee and a humble waitress has claimed her saying it. It deserves to be looked into if only because, should she have said those words, yet still get elected to the second highest office in the land, with more than a 50% chance of being the actual president, America would be saying something disturbingly retrogade to its people and the rest of the world, pushing back social progress with impunity, with such a woman at the helm.

Since she was nominated, I have been saying that Sarah Palin is unsuitable primarily because I felt that the word BEST for the job in this case had been reduced to a lower level of currency and made nonsense of the suitability of other Republican women who were far more qualified in many respects than the Alaskan Governor.

I don't care about Sarah Palin's lack of 'experience', because there is no school for presidents or vice-presidents. The job is something only those fortunate enough to be elected learn hands on, by trial and error, no matter how 'experienced' they might appear beforehand. No, three other things bother me about this lady which are far more important, I believe, to this high office and to the whole question of leadership. They are all related to the news from the Washington Post that Sarah charged her state 312 days of per diem expenses for being on official duty when she was actually at home. That was nearly a year's worth of claims, $16,951 defrauded from her own state, money robbed from the poor as well as the middle classes which she had no business claiming and which doesn't seem to have affected her conscience either.

So my three reasons are:
1. A Question of Trust: Leadership is about TRUST, being able to respect someone so much, through their own credibility, that we give them the authority to lead us. We place complete trust in what they say or do because they have earned that credibility and authority through their actions. How can you trust someone who helps herself to the public purse when there are so many other needy people within her state who could have done with some of the money she awarded herself? She was not entitled to it, so she simply stole it and tried to cover up the fact that she lied about her entitlement.

2. A Question of Scruples:
If she can help herself to Alaska's taxes in such a wanton way, what would she not do to the money the hardworking Americans have paid in their taxes? Would she be helping herself to that too on a much larger scale by claiming for what she has no right to? What kind of scruples does this lady possess that would befit her for one of the country's highest offices if she can think nothing of claiming expenses for so long when perhaps many of her staff have not been s fortunate? What does that say about her care, her compassion, her genuine principles of life except for her greed and arrogance and doing what she likes?

3. An Abuse of Power:
When placed in such a high office as governor of a state, it carries certain perks and conditions but, most important, it carries certain responsibilities, the main ones being:
a. To lead by example; b. To ensure fairness and equity; c. To execute the duties with true professionalism; d. Above all, to protect the interests of the state.

By claiming money she was not entitled and for such a long time too, and in the first few months of her governorship, Sarah Palin has not shown any of those four key responsibilities. In fact, she has shown that only Sarah Palin matters, even to the extent of defrauding her own state with the claim and abusing her power.

Anyone tempted to defend the indefensible might find all sorts of excuses as to why Palin did what she did. But for someone in such an esteemed position of trust, her action was absolutely disgraceful and makes her totally unfit for any kind of office, let alone one where she could even be the President of the United States in the space of a single heartbeat!

Has the presidential office sunk so low that anyone at all, especially those who are quite prepared to take what isn't theirs, qualifies for it? Are the Republicans so desperate to win an election that they jettison their own values and accept that anyone will do, so long as she has the right gender and look?

That is a question only Americans themselves can answer because it all depends on the kind of leaders, and society, they truly desire. But this is not any old election. It decides the leadership of the free world and carries tremendous responsibility. Can it be entrusted to one who cannot herself be trusted?

Gordon Brown has caused the wrath of his compatriots in the UK, and the McCain camp, for backing Barack Obama in a magazine interview. He commented on the kind of people needed to cope with the unfolding economic problems and the way the Democrats were "generating the ideas to help people through more difficult times."

Though it is always plain to see the political preferences of the top people in power without them saying anything, It is highly unusual to hear a British Prime Minister endorse any candidate in another country so openly, considering that he/she has to work with whoever wins the election. It caught everyone by surprise and earned him some rebuke, especially from the financial centre of the City.

In the article, Mr Brown drew attention to policies to help deal with the economic downturn. He said that, around the world, it is progressive politicians who are grappling with these challenges.

"In the electrifying US Presidential campaign, it is the Democrats who are generating the ideas to help people through more difficult times. To help prevent people from losing their home, Barack Obama has proposed a Foreclosure Prevention Fund to increase emergency pre-foreclosure counselling, and help families facing repossession."

No similar mention was made of John McCain's policies.

Naturally, the conservative party seized on the gaffe to knock Mr Brown even further.

One could say that Gordon Brown, who is having real difficulties at home just now, need some magic dust off the Obama trail to lift his own fortunes through some direct association with the man himself. Hence his comment could be regarded as a cynical ploy to get some positive attention. But should a Prime Minister of one country publicly support any candidate in a foreign country, even if they privately do so?

Are there any ethics here, especially when it is often very clear which candidate a particular country might favour?

Over to you for your thoughts and perspectives. :o)

In 2001, the writer and academic, Tim Wise, made history in the UK by taking one of the top prizes in the annual British Diversity Awards(7th) held in London - see Wikipedia.

Founded by myself, these unique and prestigious awards recognised and publicly rewarded organisations and individuals in Britain and internationally who were making a significant difference in their establishments and personal efforts to celebrate diversity, promote harmony between cultures, encourage social understanding and to bring people together. The 28 of the 38 judges nationwide, who never met to prevent being influenced by one another, awarded Tim the Best Diversity Article for enabling greater understanding and appreciation of diversity issues. Until then, the title had only been won by Britons.

Colour Conscious, White Blindness, was a powerful treatise on how minorities were perceived in the 1990s relating to crime. Using numerous examples on both sides of the colour divide, Wise left readers in no doubt as to the biased perception of people of colour, and how majority 'white privilege' ensured they were always viewed and treated unfairly.

A short excerpt of his award-winning article read:
By racializing danger, we lend legitimacy to what D'Souza calls "rational discrimination." Thus, if certain types of people seem more dangerous, then it's O.K. to refuse to pick up anyone of their race in your cab, or refuse to hire them, or keep them out of your neighborhood or for the cops to rough them up a bit. It's rational. Far from mere rhetorical excess this logic has been utilized by a California judge to justify murder. In the 1991 trial of Soon Ja Du, charged with shooting and killing Black teen, Latasha Harlans, the judge handed down only a nominal fine, explaining that the event should be viewed in the context of Du's family's "history of being victimized and terrorized by gang members." Not victimized and terrorized by Harlans, mind you, but by people who looked like Harlans. One can only wonder how this kind of argument would hold up if used by a Black man to justify his killing a white cop because of his prior experiences with police brutality.

"So in just a few short years, comments about the pathology of people of color have gone from the margins of political discourse to the center. Discussions of crime have become increasingly racialized and our dialogue on race increasingly criminalized, such that deviance is now seen by many as synonymous with melanin, or Black culture. Meanwhile whites, no matter how criminal or "deviant" our behaviors may be, are allowed the privilege of individualization. We're allowed to be "just bad persons," unlike non-whites who come to be seen collectively as bad people....

Fast forward to today, and I was amazed to receive his latest article relating to the American elections in my mailbox. It is so hot, it was only written two days ago and gives some real insights into white privilege and these 2008 elections.

Entitled This is Your Nation on White Privilege, the blog lists various ways white privilege is still manifesting itself in this election year and begins:

"For those who still can't grasp the concept of white privilege, or who are constantly looking for some easy-to-understand examples of it, perhaps this list will help.

White privilege is when you can get pregnant at seventeen like Bristol Palin and everyone is quick to insist that your life and that of your family is a personal matter, and that no one has a right to judge you or your parents, because "every family has challenges," even as black and Latino families with similar "challenges" are regularly typified as irresponsible, pathological and arbiters of social decay.

White privilege is when you can call yourself a "fu*kin' redneck," like Bristol Palin's boyfriend does, and talk about how if anyone messes with you, you'll "kick their fu*kin' ass," and talk about how you like to "shoot sh*t" for fun, and still be viewed as a responsible, all-American boy (and a great son-in-law to be) rather than a thug."

So is America still denying the existence of white privilege which automatically allows one section ofits community to be treated better than the others? Decide for yourself with the rest of the article.

This is Your Nation on White Privilege (The Red Room Blog)

Tim Wise's website

The focus has been on Sarah Palin since her nomination for Vice-President. That was not so surprising given the fact that she is a woman, and a virtual unknown one at that, who would have attracted immediate attention. Everyone has been talking about her being a 'heartbeat' away from the presidency. That's all well and good, but she is not the presidential GOP candidate. John McCain is, and the public should be giving him greater scrutiny as the lead man and asking certain uncomfortable questions. While Sarah has been in the spotlight, he has been lurking without having to answer too much to the opposition. But some burning questions are beginning to surface.

Why did he appoint this particular candidate as VP?

Is he too weak to be president for the whole term and is thus ensuring that a seemingly physically and emotionally strong person is there to take over, should something happen to him?

What are his medical records currently saying?

At 72 years old, how long before the stress of being in the top job in America begin to take its toll and leave him struggling to cope?

Would he be the front man while Sarah Palin is the de facto person in charge?

How much is he really up to the job of being in such an important global office?

Sorting out McCain's capability of being president should be a priority, given that the actual election is only two months away. As Frank Rich echoed in the New York Times recently:

It's an urgent matter, because if we've learned anything from the G.O.P. convention and its aftermath, it's that the 2008 edition of John McCain is too weak to serve as America's chief executive. This unmentionable truth, more than race, is now the real elephant in the room of this election.

No longer able to remember his principles any better than he can distinguish between Sunnis and Shia, McCain stands revealed as a guy who can be easily rolled by anyone who sells him a plan for "victory," whether in Iraq or in Michigan. A McCain victory on Election Day will usher in a Palin presidency, with McCain serving as a transitional front man, an even weaker Bush to her Cheney.

Do you agree with this prediction?

Is McCain really too weak for the presidency and should he be replaced by a fitter, more capable candidate?

Over to you!

Rachel Maddow, in doing her hilarious John Mccain's Week in Review, nailed it on the head with the segment where he kept getting the initials of the financial agencies wrong, mixing up the names of people he would fire and generally showing how inept he really is for the key task ahead - and all in one week, as well! I am no political pundit. I represent the humble voter, and this gentleman can fool the public all he wants, but to other presidents and those with a brain, McCain is no president.

The five reasons that weaken his claim to high office are the following: 1. His faculties: John McCain's faculties seem to be failing him rapidly. Some of his speeches are proving to be downright embarrassing as they make little sense to the listener, and often need an interpreter! He doesn't seem to hear the questions that require a simple answer and he cannot even remember well known agency acronyms, the names of key people, distinguish actual leaders from rebels or even accurately state geographical names of places. That is really terrible for an American leader to whom other countries look for guidance. And it has very little to do with his age, either, because I am 60 years old and I am absolutely certain that when I am 72 I will be a darn sight more compos mentis than John McCain, and even more gorgeous!!

2. His detachment from reality: The man seems really detached from the voters' every day world, saying only what comes to mind, and what the spin doctors want to hear, instead of linking it to actual reality. How can a top politician, aiming to have his finger on the pulse of the nation's growth, get it so wrong as to say that the economy is very strong in the current climate, then witness major banks falling down the next day in such a 'strong' economy? Which tea leaves was he reading? Which America does he live in? Perhaps the one where he has 10 houses and ordinary fellow Americans have none!

3. His failure to grasp the issues: The most embarrassing reason against him being the next president is McCain's failure to grasp the real issues of the day and to provide any kind of workable solutions. Everything he says appears to be mere sound bytes that changes with his town hall appearance and almost at a whim. He has flip flopped so much on every topic to suit the moment, one cannot keep up with him any more. It's like a reinvention of a new McCain every week! Yet being in the White House is not just about American issues. It is also about world issues, as Iraq, Iran and Russia are proving just now. If he cannot even remember which country is which, will he be bombing the wrong country at 3 am in the morning?

4. His constant and irrelevant use of his POW status: The country owes a debt to John McCain, and all the other POWs for their sacrifices. However, every time McCain uses his POW status to prove a point he actually insults the thousands of fellow POWs who did not make it (yet he is alive!), who have terrible injuries and trauma (his are certainly not as bad as theirs) and who lack the resources and high pension to live the quality of life he does! He also loves to emphaise being a POW, but how has he helped his fellow veterans in voting for their needs? Sheer hypocrisy and superficiality to aid his campaign.

5. His overall impression of ineptitude: A true leader LOOKS the part, SOUNDS it and ACTS it. There is nothing leader-like in McCain's manner, words or actions. He appears to act more like a very bad, doddering puppet being controlled by others in what he says and does, than someone who has a grasp of reality, who believes what he says and who says it with a vengeance and conviction. One gets the feeling that John McCain has the overriding ambition to be President of the USA without the substance to go with it.

Leadership also has three crucial elements: Credibility, Respect and Authority. Those combine to form TRUST. McCain has no credibility in his words and actions, hence he is not getting as much respect as he should and he certainly lacks the authority on current form to take an awful lot of people with him. So how can he be trusted with such a massive task? Yet he is aspiring to be the leader of the free world, to be the keeper of the nuclear button, to be ready for that 3 a.m call and for the rigours of such high office. No wonder Sarah Palin made a big gaffe in her speech (wishful thinking perhaps?) talking about what would happen on a "Palin-McCain" ticket. He is already subconsciously relegated to second fiddle!!

It's like watching the Bumbling Brothers Circus. You keep covering your eyes and ears in fear of what will happen next! Is that any way to run a country, let alone the leading country in the world? It really makes me wonder whether some Americans are so desperate to get anyone - correction, any White male - in power that just any old person will do, so long as they have a pulse!! John McCain's time was in 2004. In this 2008, he is clearly four years too late. Maybe when the elections are over he will finally grasp the big difference between the chairman of the SEC and that of the FEC!

Looking at the attention the 2008 American elections have grabbed, it is easy to see just one reason why these elections are like no other: Barack Obama. But he is just one of the reasons. There are actually three main ones that combine to make this appear the most electrifying race in the history of choosing occupants of the White House.

I cannot remember when, during the last 40 years, as a voting adult in the UK, I have ever been interested in an American election. In fact, the only time I was truly aware of an American president, was in 1963 with the death of John F Kennedy. That was like a horrible blip on the landscape and things went back to normal when the grieving was over. I was also only 15 years old then, a good three years away from being able to vote. I guess my tears were for such a good looking and captivating man being cut down in his prime than him being president, as I was still at the hero worship stage when he and his wife were like British monarchs!

Fast forward to the 1990s and Bill Clinton also appealed, for a variety of reasons, but again, we only noticed him over here once he was in office, when we compared him to JFK, and especially because of Monica Lewinsky. We were not interested in the actual election race. Now in 2008 I am fixed to every debate and action of an amazing election and I believe, like most other people, it isn't just because of the election process itself. There are other significant reasons for it.

First, the Internet has changed the way elections will be fought and money will be raised forever. It has had the most dramatic effect on campaigning through blogging, organising and mobilising support, fund raising and the sheer visibility of the candidates. There has been no other election where the Internet has dominated the pace, the progress and perhaps even the outcome of what is happening daily. The Internet can scarcely be controlled, yet it is formidable in what is possible with it. The Internet has also brought a diverse world closer together and allows everyone to follow global events closely at the touch of a button. It is now easier to appreciate the intricacies of the campaign and focus on the candidates.

Second, the presence of both a Black man and a woman as key contenders with a genuine chance of winning the presidency. Yes, there have been other Black males, and other women have run for the Vice Presidency, but Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton represented the first real Democratic choice, in both gender and colour, that could make it to the White House and had the tremendous support to bring their individual dreams to life too. The fact that Barack is also inspirational and in a class of his own has certainly moved the usual campaigning goal posts and raised hopes well beyond expectations. Not to mention changing some of the traditional approaches to how presidential elections have been run and proving the pundits wrong, time and time again..

Third, the state of America in the world order at present. The United States has fallen from grace for a lot of reasons, not least through the war in Iraq and the dramatic slide in the dollar over recent years. It doesn't command the ultimate power it used to and disillusioned nationals, who have seen their standard of living slide equally with the country's reputation, are crying "Enough!" They now demand a change to see what else is possible, rather than having more of the same. In the new and untried candidacy of Barack Obama they see hope and are galvanising behind him to raise that hope to the highest levels of action.

Put those three reasons together and you have an explosive combination of excitement, apprehension, motivation, leadership, innovation and sheer possibility. A potent mix which might just bubble over into reality after November 4th!

John McCain is feeling the heat just now. The economy is in disarray and he is not sure how to act in the face of the latest developments. What better way to deflect attention from his own ineptitude, and growing unpopularity, by actually calling the shots, making a grand statesmanlike stance of heading back to the Capitol, as though all urgent decisions depend on his presence, and appearing to take the initiative from Barack Obama. But all that is a smokescreen for what is actually happening in McCain's campaign and hiding behind that devious blank screen are the following reasons, in order of priority;

1. He wants to deflect attention from Obama by making himself appear more concerned. He is not winning on any front just now and, by deciding to head off alone to Washington in the middle of a crisis, he hopes to appear more caring, more concerned and more adept at dealing with such crises. But, any president needs to multi-task as well. They have to carry on with other business of state, no matter what is happening around them. They cannot just drop anything they like to concentrate on just one event, when life doesn't go in single file! All kinds of things happen in every single day and one has to be prepared to cope with them. That is the mark of a true leader. Not cherry-picking what depicts them in the best light.

2. He is simply buying time. He will have to resume campaigning soon, whether he likes it or not, unless he drops out of the race altogether. The campaign cupboard is obviously bare and needs re-stocking! This ploy is just to buy some time to develop a new strategy, in view of the economic alert, and to come out fighting in a few days time, pretending to have all the answers, and appropriate knowledge, because of his trip to Washington. This is such a transparent move, it is almost laughable. What better way of wrong-footing your opponent by doing something entirely unexpected, and at a sensitive time when everyone expects tangible leadership, than in the middle of the biggest crisis America has faced for a while? He can let off all kinds of hot air without substance while commanding the attention for as long as possible.

3. He is getting behind in the polls. The latest polls (average 52% Obama-43% McCain) show the build-up of support growing around Obama as the last full month of campaigning approaches. A fraught time where every vote counts and establishing a definite lead into November becomes important. The Palin effect has worn off and now the stark, naked choice facing the people is becoming more transparent than the emperor's new clothes! He is beginning to feel a wind of exposure blowing in some uncomfortable parts and has decided to do something different to see if that changes the trend!!

4. He wants to avoid a debate at all cost at this particular time. In view of what he recently said about the economy being in very good shape, how can he go on a debate and answer a question about his own faulty assessment? How does he explain his feel-good position in the face of the awful reality? How can he allow himself to be shown up by Obama in such a terrible, ignorant light when the state of the economy is the most important element of a nation that affects every single citizen? Yet he got it so wrong the day two commercial giants collapsed, that would be a difficult issue to sidestep with your opponent on top form!

5. A show of strength and competence. He is trying to show how much he is prepared for the unexpected, how competent he is at dealing with unexpected events like these, and how much better he is at reacting to situations than Barack Obama. It is a vain attempt to gloss over his own detachment from reality, to take the attention off Sarah Palin's latest media failure, and to keep the focus on himself. But there is a danger of such ploys backfiring, if one cannot deliver the goods after loudly banging the drums!

There is no two ways about it, Barack Obama won the first debate hands down. One couldn't say that it was the most memorable debate, or there was anything in particular that stood out. However, if one took an average of the six most significant post-debate polls, Obama won 52% to McCain's 35%, a clear and unmistakable 17% difference across the board.

Looking at all the comments by pollsters and the debate itself, there are three significant conclusions to be made.

First, that McCain didn't really offer much except to keep saying that Obama 'didn't understand'.

That's not an argument in itself. If someone doesn't understand, it is usually because they are either too immature to grasp the point, they lack the necessary knowledge/source to appreciate the point or has stopped listening because they have alternate viewpoints to match that. He was also condescending in his manner, felt it difficult to look at Obama directly and came across more as a scolding father figure than the next confident President of the USA.

Second, Obama was more respectful and perhaps too deferential. He tended to agree with McCain more, affirmed his views much more and looked at him directly to show his respect for his opponent. He did not flinch on any difficult questions and was not afraid to respond to anything thrown at him. He seemed confident in that adversarial situation and quite at ease with himself.

Finally, Obama looked 'presidential'. Most of the comments pointed to that aspect, a very important one. Such a view comes out of perception and individual perception IS the reality. If he looks like a president, it is a short step to seeing him as the president! To look the part and act the part is the most important basis for actually fitting the part. This man is presidential in every respect: the way he treats his opponent, the way he tackles the questions, the way he handles himself in tight situations. He might not have had McCain's 'experience', but on the night of the first crucial debate, Barack Obama showed why he is undoubtedly heading for the White House.

This is a very neat little quiz called Match-o-Matic. What I love about it is that it presents pairs of statements said by both presidential parties which you have to vote on. If you are like me, who has hardly paid attention to any of the in depth comments on the issues, then the statements would be brand new for you, which presents a dilemma, as each statement used appear very reasonable to any audience.

I carefully went through all the statements dealing with all the issues and came out with a majority score for Barack Obama. That did not surprise me so much. But what did amaze me was that I gave three votes to John McCain!! I wouldn't believe I that could ever agree with anything McCain said. And that is what fascinates me here. How many people doing this exercise, who started off on one side of the fence, will end up voting for the other side because their statements are perfectly plausible and suitable in the cold light of day? It should be interesting to see.

What this little test shows up is that labelling people with party names, to be either one thing or the other, is often a useless activity as we tend to react to the moment: what seems RIGHT and PLAUSIBLE. Not just what aligns with party politics.

Why don't you have a go now? Then come back here and put your results in the poll, as well as your comments on the exercise. Be honest now! It should make for a great debate.

What do the vice-presidential debate and a racist incident that same day in a middle school have in common? Not much, on the face of it, but on a deeper level, they are both indicative of the state of America today; the low expectations of value, the low expectations of leadership and the increasingly low acceptance of what counts as right and wrong.

First of all, the debate. There has been much comment, most of it hot air, around the anticipated gladiatorial battle between Joe Biden for the Democrats and Sarah Palin for the Republicans. In many other cases, this would have been a non-event: so completely predictable in outcome, so false and superficial and so patroniising to public intelligence as to be almost nonsensical. Yet, the outcome has been presented as some kind of victory for Biden and a 'did much better than expected' scorecard for Palin. Phew, relief all round. She can rest easily now! This assessment is despite the fact that Sarah Palin scored an average of only 32% favourability rating across all the main polls compared to 57% for Joe Biden, a significant difference of 25% between them!

But when did a very competent man dumbing down his skills to suit an incompetent female opponent, who is clearly out of her depth, rate as a fair contest? When did a candidate choosing to answer only the questions she wanted while ignoring the rule of the debate become a true sign of talent and leadership? And when did a stream of regurgitated sound bytes from John McCain count as original answers to test personal capability? In case no one wants to say it, wants to admit it and is still pretending that the emperor has some clothes on, I will point out the bloody obvious: No amount of cribbing, cramming and ramming will make this lady any better than she has been or any more suitable for the highest placed deputy in the world.

Sarah Palin is so mediocre for a possible Vice President, she could even be dangerous to the country's reputation and growth. I will say that again in another form for those who might have missed it first time: Sarah Palin needs to stop now before she digs herself any deeper into a hole which is getting increasingly wider and more overwhelming! America needs to have a good look at itself and where it is going for the good of its children - its future and the mere thought of Sarah being anywhere near the hot seat of power. This has nothing to do with whether Obama is elected or not. Forget him. It has a lot to do with the standards of one of the most powerful countries, the pride in itself and where it wishes to go. If it sees Sarah Palin as a possible leader then that is NOT the America I have been in admiration of all my life, that we in Britain have envied so openly or the country that has set a commanding lead for others to follow.

America is the leader of the free world, for God's sake. Is Palin really the best they can proffer for the rest of that world to emulate? Someone who didn't do as badly as expected? What happened to someone brilliant, intelligent, knowledgeable, learned, inspiring, motivational, admirable, fantastic and articulate, to name a few? Aren't those qualities allowed at the top anymore in the new low-bar, anything-goes America?

School of bias
Apparently not, otherwise more effective action would have been taken in the case of the middle school teacher for seventh graders, in Marianna, Florida, who used the CHANGE word to represent an acronym which called Barack Obama a nigger. He wrote it on the blackboard for the kids to see it. He emphasised the word for their benefit. His offending sentence was reported as "Can you Help a Nigger Get Elected?" In a classroom of young kids in multicultural America, in the 21st century, this was possible. As a former teacher, I kept thinking of those kids of all colours and creeds, especially the ones who were Black and represented young 'niggers' in his eyes, having to sit through that whether they liked it or not. They would have been exposed to that poisonous label of disrespect, their value immediately crushed under the weight of racism and privilege, forced to endure that person's meanness, prejudice and vindictiveness, a captured audience in a sea of mediocrity.

I also thought of this man each day shaping those malleable young minds whatever way he chooses, denying the presence and value of some kids at the stroke of a pen, while raising the value of others at a whim, kids entirely at his mercy, and I felt a kind of impotent rage. What did he get for this gross abuse of power? 10 days suspension and some sensitivity training. What happened to instant dismissal from the education system and being prosecuted for breach of trust? What are we coming to when a system can condone such naked racism by having such a person still teaching the young?

I guess it is the same system, the same authority, the same new low-bar America that would willingly accept Sarah Palin to be a bona fide, skilled, articulate and deserving possible president in a heartbeat. The one suddenly regarded as 'qualified' for high office. The best many believe they have available to lead the most powerful country in the free world!

Gulp!!

There are four crucial weeks left to the American elections, a very long time to test political fortunes. To the Democrats it must feel like the end is so tantalisingly near yet so achingly far away, in view of what is possible for both sides of the race up to then. Already, the Republicans are baring their nasty fangs. Bereft of innovative ideas, deprived of any real leadership and with no obvious solutions to any of the country's pressing problems (goodness knows there are many!), the intreprid Republicans, headed by John MCcain and Sarah Palin, have decided to take leave of their collective senses and get stuck into the mud instead.

The problem with accusing your opponent of anything at all that smacks of smear, slander or simple nastiness, is that two can play the same game. Having been in the line of 'terrorist for friend' fire all weekend, Barack Obama's team is now hitting back with a short documentary about McCain and Keating, an association that would have been better left unearthed in view of what is happening in the current economic meltdown.

According to David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager:
"At noon Eastern on Monday, October 6th, we're releasing a 13-minute documentary about the scandal called "Keating Economics: John McCain and the Making of a Financial Crisis". it will be available at KeatingEconomics.com, along with background information that every voter should know. The point of the film and the web site is that John McCain still hasn't learned his lesson."

Oh, dear. I am sure the last thing that McCain needs right now is for the public to be reminded of what a hash he helped to make of the economy through deregulation.

When one resorts to smears about others, especially when there is little truth in them, one can expect the following five things to happen:

1. It emphasises how little one knows of the issues and has to resort to negative distractions to divert attention from one's inadequacy and ignorance. One is simply hiding one's unsuitability behind a handy scapegoat.

2. It draws attention to the poverty of one's leadership, especially when leaders are supposed to be statesmanlike, not street fighters hitting below the belt.

3. It loses sight of the important reasons for the election and seeking office: i:e the country and the nation, not the candidates themselves.

4. It demeans the whole office being contended, in this case the presidency if the United States.

5. It tends to unleash the floodgates of retaliatory action.

If the Republicans want to have a hope in hell of winning this election, McCain and Palin need to urgently return to providing the exact reasons why people should vote FOR them, not providing spurious claims why voters should vote AGAINST Obama! People will only listen to smears and nastiness for a little while. Some might be influenced by it but the majority soon work things out for themselves. After that, accusations become rather boring and counter-productive, tending to backfire with a vengeance in the end.

The Republican vice-presidential nominee, Sarah Palin, appears to be on a roll. Desperate to revert the losing tide of support for the GOP, and having begun the attack on Barack Obama with some significant press coverage, she is now wallowing deep into the slanderous mud hoping that if she can throw enough at him, some of it might just stick. She has not noticed that in her eagerness to defame him, the crowd is not exactly with her and is, in fact, heavily divided. There have been reports that every time she mentions Barack negatively, she is booed. But that does not appear to have deterred her.

When people agree with someone, they will applaud and cheer. It reflects how they are thinking and it makes them feel comfortable. If they are booing, they are experiencing some dissonance between what they expect and what they are actually getting. That breeds fear. Add some people who are definitely cheering what is being said, some who are racist anyway and are grateful for anything to attack Obama, some who are waving thunder sticks and shouting abuse at the press, plus another white person telling a Black camera crew member to 'Sit down, boy', after she blamed Katie Couric and the press for her "less than successful interview", and yet another firebrand who is so riled up that he is shouting "Kill him! Kill him" meaning Barack, and the cauldron is already boiling, ready to be fanned with discontent to overflow point.

That is what appears to have happened at Palin's latest rally, the atmosphere of which was rather threatening. Yet, up until her inclusion in the race, the election had been going at a sensible pace with some mutual respect on either side of the campaign fence. I hope this lady takes a long hard look at what she is doing and work out exactly what results she desires. If she continues in this vein, to stir up hatred and fear against certain vulnerable members of the community, it's the whole of America that could end up paying a heavy price because it could get pretty ugly. Nothing good, or constructive, ever comes from heated divisions and accusations.

But I doubt if that bothers Ms Palin in the least as much as fulfilling her naked ambition to be in the vicinity of the White House, seemingly, at any cost to the nation!

Why, ME, of course! :o) For a variety of reasons I have settled on the Windy City for my gadabout.
(Expected vacation dates -14 days: October 23 - November 5th.)

I have decided that is where I wish to go for my well earned break and am now finalising my plans. It isn't 100% certain yet but very likely at this moment.

Naturally, to make the trip really memorable, and to have a fantastic time I need the following like yesterday:

1. Some caring, knowledgeable friends who will act as guides and give me all the low down. I expect to have tons of lunches and other dates with all my Viner friends in the vicinity. :o)

2. Suggestions of well known Chicagoans I might interview while I'm there.

3. Suggestions of organisations that might require a dynamic British speaker on motivational, career, emotional and empowerment or simple staff-management issues. 5. Great places to boogie and smooch, as I LOVE dancing, that's how I keep looking fab!

And, a wonderful possible bonus

6. A gorgeous, eligible hunk (who likes smooching and dancing too) who wishes to be captivated and mesmerised by an equally eligible sultry-voiced Brit!! (Have enclosed some latest pics to remind my friends (and potential suitors!) of what I look like before my new face!)

As you can see, my list isn't really asking a lot, is it? :o)

I am so excited, I can't wait to be there. Chicago won't know what has hit it!!