One headline in particular, from Israel's Haaretz, could aptly sum up the feelings of the Palestinian blogosphere: “Obama visit all about wooing Jewish American voters.” Indeed, the words of the Palestinian blogosphere echo this notion, with particular focus on Obama's choice of Sderot as a destination.

bruised earth felt that Obama took advantage of the situation by visiting Sderot, not giving thought to how his actions would affect greater Palestinian opinion. The blogger remarked:

I know he is looking for some votes - but the nerve to visit Sderot (with just a flying visit of Ramallah - where no such statements were made) and again speak out against the daily misery of border settlers who have chosen (!) to live in this location and who are not caged or bound - or worse - imprisoned by the military, shows a level of ‘cheek’ here-to-fore unimaginable.

Let us not forget that Obama was the one Presidential hopeful strong enough to speak out against the violence and plight perpetrated on the Palestinian people. Where is that leader now? Are we to assume he will return once elected?

A very dangerous game continues to unfold…can votes possibly be worth this?

The title of a recent blog post from Desertpeace reads “Obama at the Wall.” Using few words, the blogger explained further:

NOT the wall of apartheid as one might have hoped…..But the Western Wall.

AMPAL (American Palestinian) expressed surprise that Obama hadn't visited the Holy Sepulchre, explaining:

Quite the contrary, it seems that the correct place for a CHRISTIAN future president of the United States of American to visit (kinda like his visit to AIPAC's convention days after he won the nomination) is to the Jewish Wailing Wall. Mind you the Moslem's third holy site, the Haram al Sharif, is just across that Wailing Wall. Seems like he has got it right twice in a row: prostrate yourself, nay, grind yourself into the dirt, in front of the rulers of your destiny (Zionists of both American and Israeli flavors) in order that you be receive some blessing by the so-called Chosen Ones. And even then they doubt you Oh Obama…

While other bloggers focused on Obama's actions, The Angry Arabs' Comment Section took issue with his words, particularly his proclamation that Jerusalem “will be the capital of Israel.” The blogger pondered:

Huh? The phrase “I say it will be the capital” is diametrically opposed to the view that it's a final status issue to be negotiated by the parties. Unless he's got a crystal ball and knows the outcome in advance.

The question remains: Will Obama's seemingly unwavering support of Israel strongly affect his campaign? Joseph Al-Khoury, writing for the Arabdemocracy blog, gives reasons why, for Arab-Americans, it shouldn't:

The US has been unwavering in its support for the Zionist entity since its creation in 1948 providing it consistently with the financial, technological, military means to dominate the Middle East and wreck the hopes of one Arab generation after the other. This is unlikely to change regardless of who takes over the White House come November. But two factors Arab voters should consider while casting their votes. The first factor is that An Obama administration will not be motivated by ideology in its position vis-a-vis Israel while remnants of the neo-conservative and evangelical Christian agenda will persist in a Bush-McCain transition. Pragmatic policies might still be detrimental to the Palestinians but are easier to debate and challenge than those backed by divine intervention. The second factor is that the election of a Liberal modern Black man to the highest office will be good for America, whatever foreign policy he adopts. This is a revolution in the making and as all astute immigrants know it is by joining hands with the locals for the common good that you gain acceptance. As the American poet Gil Scott-Heron cynically puts it: ‘The revolution will not be televised…’ but the election certainly will!

Most of the comments in the Politico article on this ranged from puzzled to exasperated. The best comment was by the Republican hack who joked they are probably banning croissant consumption because of its crescent shape.

The nervous staffers are probably just avoiding a Rachel Ray moment. We all know the Islamophobe blogosphere is quite capable of zaniness when it comes to interpreting what people wear.

His campaign, for being so careful about colors, has unfortunately let him wear other controversial colors in the past: Confederate grey, Mussolini brown, Nazi Red, and Hurricane Katrina flood waters blue.

Sandmonkey begins his argument by declaring that he is happy with Obama and McCain being the nominees of the Republican and the Democratic parties.
He writes:

I am happy because both men are not the conventional nominees of their parties, and they are more interested in creating common ground with the other side's voter bloc than they are in pandering to their base.

Upon examining the electoral programs for the two gentlemen, Sandmonkey says:

In my house , right now, I have the electoral programs for both Obama and McCain, and reading them has provided me with hours of constant amusement. McCain's program is under the impression that the world is great and everything is fine and dandy, and all we really have to do is to bomb a couple more areas in the world (a bomb here, a couple there) and all will be well with the world again. I personally love it, but that's because I am Pro-Death and would welcome anything that would bring the world's population down a notch, but I doubt the rest of you exactly share my sentiment, so, ehh, yeah, bad electoral program, bad!

Obama's on the other hand, well, it kinda reads like someone's sophomore year college term paper on “the joys of socialism”. It's nice, it's sweet, it's humane, it's unrealistic *******. Oh, and if you would like to challenge that world view, please inform me how this man intends to both balance the budget ( with its huge deficit) and implement Universal Healthcare (which any idiot would tell you wouldn't exactly be..ehh..cheap). Or, if you are suffering from the shitty deal you got from your healthcare provider and you don't care how this gets financed, explain to me again how he will “convince” the Businesses that left the US for China or India to come back to the US, where they will have to pay both higher taxes AND labor costs, plus whatever new taxes he intends to raise to finance your healthcare. Ok, now back to McCain for a second.

Sandmonkey denies that his post is pro-McCain because he is certain that he will not win.

He is not going to win because the Party really isn't backing him- if they did they might have advised him to get something resembling an economic plan. Nope, the republicans are doing the same thing the democrats did in 2004 on for, just putting on a good show. Nothing is in the favor of this man: the base hates him cause he is secular, his views on the war are incredibly unpopular with middle- America right now, he has a wife whose history- once put out on display in the general election- will make Michelle Obama look like the Saint she ain't, and last, but not least, the age thing. Not to mention, with absolute democratic majorities in both the house and senate, he would be a lame-duck President from day one, and nothing would ever get done. I like McCain, and would've rather seen him win in 2000 than Bush, but he is not going to win this one either.

Leaving McCain aside, Sandmonkey goes into his well-thought reasons of why the world should prepare for a failed Obama presidency:

You see, if you ask any Obama supporter, they will tell you that they are supporting the man because he gives them hope. Now, Oscar Wilde once said that the basis of all hope is fear, and I intend to agree with Wilde on that one. So what exactly are the Obama supporters afraid of? Well, it's really simple, after 8 years of Bush, and of having the government repeatedly inform them that they are living in a threatening world that doesn't like them (which, by the way, is true, and it disliked them during Clinton's presidency too I may add) and that they are going to have to hunker down, get though and prepare to fight this for the long haul, they are afraid that this is really the way the world is. Enter Obama, who tells them in all kinds of inspiring fashion that this isn't necessarily true, that the world isn't really dangerous and that all we need to do is to talk to one another, and then all will be well in the world and we will all sing Kumbaya together. So, desperate and clinging to anything, they believe him, because the alternative is so scary, so stressful and depressing, that they may have to up their Zoloft dosage , and anti-depressants are really expensive nowadays.

The rant goes on to call America a “stupid girl with low self esteem in junior high” who has a fixation on who likes her and who does not.

Not to mention, Americans really want the world to like them, which is a silly desire shared by no other nation on earth. You don't see the Russians worrying about the world liking them, or the Chinese. Ok, you want a democracy? How about the French? Do you see the French worrying about whether or not the world likes them? Do you know of any other nation in the world who actually has this stupid girl-with-low-self-esteem-in- junior-high fixation? Hell, even the Israelis, arguably the current most hated country in the world (and who would like a nation of militaristic Jews who refuse to be wiped out? Those Damn Jooz!), are not as fixated on getting the world to like them the way the Americans do, because most of them have resigned themselves that the world really never will like them. So yeah, the Americans stand alone when it comes to that silly desire, and they have constructed a notion why the world dislikes them: It's because the world thinks that they are a racist nation that is also prejudiced against Islam. So, in order to remedy that, they vote and nominate a Black man with an Arab middle-name who comes from a Muslim Background, as if saying, “Here! This is how far we all willing to go. Do you like us now?” And the world will answer: Ehh, no, not really!

Sandmonkey is also ready for the counter argument:

There are those who will argue with this, citing great support for Obama all over Europe and the world. True, but that's because he is the Anti-Bush, an articulate black man who says he doesn't want war. The world would love Gary Coleman if he was the person who said this after 8 years of Bush. Plus, the world is excited for the Obama presidency because they view it as some sort of novelty, the black man who became President after all of the country's history of slavery. Americans forget that thanks to their endless stream of movies and TV shows that have addressed the history and extent of racism in the US, we all know the back-story and the struggles and Rosa Parks and Malcom X and MLK and all of this fun stuff. So, really, it's like watching a 250 year old movie where one character keeps getting screwed over and finally, through a lot of fighting, becomes President. Oh Happy Ending. We love Happy endings. What we didn't wrap our head around yet is that this isn't a movie. There is no Fade to Black after Obama takes office. He actually becomes the President and executer of policies. He will become a symbol of the country people love to hate, and this won't exactly end because he is a smooth talking good looking black guy. It's a nice fantasy, but let's get real here. There are too many people who have vested interest in hating the US and always will hate it, no matter who the **** runs it. Now let's examine this notion a little.

The post gets more and more interesting when Sandmonkey goes into his expectations of Obama's foreign policy:

Unarguably , Obama's number one foreign policy objective is to get things right with the Arab and Muslim world. And that's when you are going to watch the best circus in the world, because no a single leader, in the Arab or the Muslim world, really wants to get right with the US. Hell, our rulers have justified their entire existence in power by positioning themselves as opposed to America . They continue , in their state-sponsored media, to point fingers at the US and go ” See, those bloodthirsty Americans. They will kill you all, rape all of your women and drink the blood of your babies, if we are not here to protect you. So eat shit and shut up!”, and If you think I am exaggerating please check Egypt, Syria, Iran, Yemen, etc.. etc.. Those people have built their entire rule on that whole notion, you think they are going to give that up because the silly Americans voted for a 40-something inexperienced Black dude? Get real! And in terms of the Arab and Muslim street, let's not forget that their number one issue has always been Israel. Now, do you think Obama will go against Israel, after watching him kissing for hours AIPAC ***? Ha. So yeah, that will be a disappointment also. Not to mention that Obama won't withdraw from Iraq. He won't. He can't. At best he will do a partial withdrawal, while leaving a good chunk of US soldiers there. But bring all the troops home? Not gonna happen. And that's what the Arab and Muslim street wants, no? Let's not even contemplate the notion for a second that he is serious about going after Pakistan, like he said over and over again. Yeah, the Obama foreign policy will be- in the words of the great Borat- GREAT SUCCESS! I am sure.

I could not help but laughing out loud as I read this coming part about the Islamists and how they would react to Obama:

Oh, and I am sure that once he gets elected that the Islamists will warm up to him immediately. You know, because there is nothing that Islamists like more than a former born- Muslim who chose, by his own accord, to become a Christian and an active one at that. Yeah, I am sure they will be very impressed, and quit fighting the US immediately. After all, he said that he intends to deliver a speech from a Muslim nation in his first 100 days of office. Yeah, that kind of pandering really calms Islamists down, especially coming from apostates. And they will surely respect him if he withdraws partially from Iraq, and not mistake it as a sign of weakness or that they are winning or anything. And since we are on the topic, can you imagine what will happen if a terrorist attack took place during the Obama Presidency, after he does all of this? Can you imagine how America will feel, when they realize that even after they voted for the Blackman with Arab middle name and Muslim background who gave a speech during his first 100 days in a Muslim nation, that the world still hates them and that Islamists still want to kill them? Talk about a rude awakening. And can you imagine if they do demand a response from Obama, and Obama decides to take off the Dove hat and put the Hawk one on? Do I have to remind you how things went the last time a Dove tried to be a Hawk? Olmert and Peretz (who both, may I remind you , ran on the platform of withdrawing from the Westbank) during the Lebanon war, anyone? Ok, how about Carter and the rescue mission in Iran? How about Clinton in Somalia? We getting the picture? Should be a fantastic fun time for everyone involved.

If you are still not buying into this argument and if you are:

the kind of American who doesn't care about all that, like this silly American chick I met here a week ago, who told me that “the basis of hope is hope” and “I really don't care if your people like us, I just want to be proud of my country again!”. Ok, fair enough. So one would assume you are supporting Obama for domestic policy reasons. That you believe that he will clean Washington from the Special Interests and the lobbying and all that Jazz he has been talking about, and implements his “Socialism is fun” electoral program, aided surely, by the fact that the House and the Senate looks like it will tilt in favor of the democrats again this year, finally giving them full majority in both the house and Senate. I am sure he will be able to cut out the special interests and implement his policies in a Jiffy, right? Ehh, nope. Because even if he is not beholden to special interests- which I am not sure is exactly true-every single politician in the House and the Senate is, and they kinda like their seats. Not to mention, about half of the democrats who won in 2006 were Pro-War, Pro-Guns, Anti-Abortion democrats- i.e. confused republicans- who will undoubtedly, given how they are now fully in power, start fighting amongst themselves in earnest, the way the democrats always do. And if you don't believe me, check 1992, the first Clinton Presidential term. It's the Same shit. Charismatic unlikely democrat in the white house after 12 years of republican rule, bridled with unrealistic expectations of a starved political base who somehow expected him to miraculously solve all of their problems in the first 100 days, and had the majorities in the House and the Senate to pull it off. But he didn't. He couldn't. The Democrats were too busy fighting amongst themselves, and he was too busy trying to be a centrist and work with an institution that wouldn't work and all the hopes, dreams and expectations evaporated by the end of his first year in office. But yeah, I am sure the Obama first term will be different, because, like, he is Black. Oh, and a Washington outsider. Yes, that's the kind of person who can get things done in Congress, no doubt! But I digress, when I think of Obama, I don't think of Clinton. At the end of the day, everyone knew that Clinton would play Ball and isn't exactly driven by his own ideological view and belief in his own goodness. Nahh, when I think Obama, one name really comes to mind: Carter!

So yeah, if you are reading this and you remember those days, then please brace yourself, because it's gonna suck again for the next four years. But don't fret, there is a bright side to this, because remember, after Carter came Reagan. And maybe that's what America needs right now. To experiment with Obama to see if there is any truth to his fiction. If there is, sweet, I am not gonna hate, but there likely isn't, and that will be the necessary wake-up call that half of the US have been needing for the past 4 years. That's what it's gonna take: a colossal presidential failure of the size of Carter (whose approval ratings, by the way, make Bush's look really high, believe it or not), to get the US back into thinking about how to deal with their problems, instead of pretending they don't exist.

That being said, I will feel bad for Obama when this eventually happens though, because unlike every other President before him, Obama isn't just running as himself, he is running as the Black Candidate, so when he fails, it's not just him that will be looked upon as a failure, but his race with him. The nice white people of America will congratulate themselves when he is elected for no longer being a racist nation (they did elect a black man after all) and when he fails they probably wouldn't run another Black candidate for President for another 30 years or so. Not to mention, after Obama, being a black candidate won't be a big deal anymore. The novelty would've worn off, and the candidates will be assessed based on their experience and their plans, instead of just being an inspiring notion whose time has come as a Black Man for President of the USA. I hope this wouldn't be the case, but, ehh, I doubt it!

Politics is not my thing but this was too good to resist. When I came across Wael Nawara's writings I knew that I stumbled on a goldmine. In his post - Too Secular to Win? - Wael asked four tough questions that left his readers wondering:

What is the world coming to?

Where is Secular America?

When did people stop thinking that a person's religion is their own business?

Can Obama, if he ever wins, try to help change that? Help pick our world from these trends of rising religious-mania … starting with the US?

But will he ever win?

Wael started his post by citing an average American woman who was interviewed on CNN saying:

“I do not trust him (Obama) he is a Muslim …”

Wael found that woman's comment ridiculous and that many Americans will not vote for Obama for the same reason

which is ridiculous since Obama is NOT a Muslim. But he seems like a Muslim, enough. He could be a Muslim. His father may have been a Muslim. How ridiculous is that?

Could anyone have said: I do not trust him … he is a Jew … or he is a Catholic?

No. Not today. That would be suicidal.

Wondering what happened to secular America, Wael reminded his readers of a Regan incident:

25 years ago … Ronald Reagan, while a president, was visiting a school in Oregon, Orlando … at the end of his speech to students he said something like: “Go home and read your bible”.

The media took him for a roller coaster ride.

America had been discovering and affirming its secular voice in the previous decades … so what happened? Why isn't America so secular anymore?

In his analysis of how America lost its secular voice, Wael says:

It is a different world today … that's for sure … America had grown more religious? Possibly. The world had grown a lot more religious. I am pretty sure that the Arab-Israeli conflict had something to do with it.

Israel is a Modern Theocracy. Secular Zionists decided to use the religious sentiments to make their enterprise possible. That came with a price. The reaction to that was an Islamist resistance movement which decidedly used the same sentiment … religion … a different religion … Is it really that different …?

Wael did not overlook the role of the media in his analysis and how satellite TV and how it has boosted the “religious industry”

Satellite TV came … and with it the Religious Industry in the US and elsewhere flourished. With Religious Celebrities … movie-star-like Charisma … they own their channels or programs … and they own their private planes … and raise millions of dollars in donations … they play on fear and frustration … and they spread hatred and suspicion.

We have those modern “Breachers” here too in Egypt and the region … the Movie-Star, Talk-Show religious figures …

Obviously a supporter of Obama, Wael thinks that

Obama today has to say … “I pray to Jesus Christ, our Savior … ” to stand a winning chance surely with recommendations from his campaign advisors. Obama, has to put up a show of Christian faith before the voters, to stand a chance.

The cartoon, displayed on the front of the July 21, 2008 edition of the weekly news and culture magazine, depicted Obama in traditional African muslim dress and head wrap giving a “knuckle tap” to his wife, Michelle, who wears camouflage fatigues with a machine gun strapped to her shoulder. Behind the couple, a U.S. flag burns in the fireplace and a picture of Osama bin Laden adorns a wall.

Editors at the magazine claimed the cover was intended as satire. The presumptive Democratic nominee who will face Republican John McCain for the U.S. presidency said he was not bothered by the cartoon, but said it was insulting to Muslim Americans. A New Yorker reporter found he could not secure a seat on the Senator’s press plane to follow the Senator on his recent trip to the Middle East.

The New Yorker is generally viewed as one of the best magazines in the United States. However, Ian Scattergood, a British citizen living in Poland, wonders how the cartoon will affect regular voters.

This is all very well for the more sophisticated readers of The New Yorker but surely this will do nothing other than feed the fears of America’s less sophisticated voters who probably miss the satire completely and just take everything fed to them at face value. I can see why Obama might not like it although I think the ‘offensive’ tag is a little off. Still, he can hardly come out and say “I don’t like it because a lot of my less intelligent countrymen might not get the joke”. According to the article, a survey has suggested that 12% of Americans think Obama is a Muslim, so his worries are not exactly without foundation!

From Nigeria, Snazzy, in the blog Aijuswanarite, says the cartoon got the satire wrong.

I must say that the New Yorker Obama cartoon is beyond ridiculous, I mean are they effing kidding! As someone said, if they were saying that this was a portrait of right wing views, why didn't they have some republican (read McCain) think it in a bubble.

A Review of Cuban-American blogs.

If the New Yorker had placed Raúl Castro's picture over the mantel instead of Osama's or found some other way to insert him in the scene (perhaps trying to insert Obama), the cartoon would have been a graphic condensation of my own thought on the Manchurian couple. Of course, we know that artist Barry Blitt intended the cartoon as a lampoon of people like me, that is, clear-thinking people. But his efforts backfired because he got too close to the truth and violated the #1 rule at the New Yorker: “Cartoons Must Not Be Funny.”

Tell me about yourself, Darryl.

My name is Darryl Wolk and I was born in Kapuskasing, Ontario Canada. I attended the University of Windsor and did my MBA with undergrad degrees in Political Science and Commerce. Politically, I have volunteered for several leadership races and local election campaigns for the Conservative Party of Canada, Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario and have been active in municipal elections in my current town of Newmarket, Ontario and located just outside of Toronto. I am currently the President of the Newmarket Rotary Club and care deeply about international issues and needs within my community. I started a blog initially with the purpose of providing information and opinion about issues I care about locally, provincially and internationally. I have family in both the US and Canada but am a Canadian citizen and do not hold US citizenship. On Super Tuesday, I was fortunate enough to have the opportunity to spend a few days campaigning for Barack Obama and witnessing his speech live in Chicago. It was a great experience and felt like the Superbowl of politics from a Canadian point of view. I think Reuters and Global Voices website Voices without Votes is doing a great job in terms of gathering a group of talented international bloggers with diverse opinions on the upcoming US Presidential race and I feel very fortunate to have been given the opportunity to participate.

When did your interest in politics start?

I have been interested in politics and current events almost all of my life but really started taking an interest in my first year of high school. I have been heavily active in Canadian politics since the Progressive Conservative and Reform parties merged and Belinda Stronach was running for leader representing my riding of Newmarket-Aurora.

What, initially, got you interested in U.S. politics?

I first got interested in politics during the time of Reagan who I admire a great deal. NAFTA was a major issue in Canada at the time. I also liked Bill Clinton and felt he was a great leader who I respect a great deal and have had the opportunity to hear him speak on a couple of occasions in Toronto. In Canada, American politics is everywhere. Ninety per cent of Canadians live within 100 miles of the US border, the largest undefended border in the world. All of the major newspapers have been filled with coverage of the primaries. We get the American version of CNN as opposed to the international version seen elsewhere. Fox News, MSNBC, ABC, NBC, CBS and many other American networks are readily available here. The Colbert Report and Daily Show are popular in Canada along with late night talk shows and Saturday Night Live. This current election has been very exciting for Canadians and Americans alike. Recent polls in Canada have shown that a majority of Canadians would trade their Canadian vote for a one in the US election while another showed Barack Obama would win a Canadian election as leader of either the Liberal Party or Conservative Party.

American politics has a huge impact on Canadian politics. Eighty pc of our exports go to the United States with bilateral trade volume worth 1.5 billion per day. Canada is the America's number one energy supplier and this has resulted in massive development of the Alberta oil sands. In Windsor I lived near the Ambassador Bridge where 10 million vehicles travel back and forth to Detroit each year. Good Canadian relations with the United States essential for our economy, security and shared international interests. As members of NATO we are fighting shoulder to shoulder in Afghanistan with American forces and also experienced casualties in the 9/11 attacks. We consider America are closest friend and ally along with the UK. We chose not to participate in the current Iraq war, although we took part in the first Gulf War, Kosovo, Korea and in two world wars where we fought shoulder to shoulder for freedom with the United States. Arctic sovereignty is becoming a big issue in Canada following Russia planting a flag at the North Pole. The decline of the US dollar is also hurting our manufacturing based economy in Ontario. Issues like NAFTA-gate with Obama and John McCain coming up to deliver a speech in Ottawa has injected Canada into the US election campaign and the US Presidential race into our upcoming federal election. Good relations with the United States are crucial to our economy, security and foreign policy in Canada.

It is also impossible to talk about issues like Russia, China, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Kosovo, North Korea, Iran, Pakistan or bringing peace to the Middle East without factoring in US foreign policy and decisions coming from the American president. Progress on issues like the environment, poverty, disease, human rights, stopping the spread of nuclear weapons, terrorism and the global economy cannot be achieved without the United States stepping forward and playing a large leadership role. How Americans vote in November will have a major impact on how the rest of the world moves forward on a series of issues that have a global impact.

How do you think most Canadians, or non-Americans in general, view politics in the U.S.?

I think Canada is a bit different than most non-Americans because of our shared cultures and exposure to American media and politics. People in Europe, the Middle East, South America, Africa and Asia would have a different view of American politics based on their own unique perspectives and issues of concern.

In many ways American politics is seen as the big leagues with Canadian politics being the minor leagues. American campaigns are huge with hundreds of millions spent and 24 hour news coverage on TV every day not to mention the blogs, Facebook, YouTube and mainstream media. Election night coverage with exit polls, immediate projections and best political team on television coverage is unheard of here. Right now in Canada, we do not have the charisma or hype around any of our leaders in the same way we have seen South of the border with Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and some of the other contenders in the primaries. I think most Canadians are fascinated with the primary process and current race going on in the United States between John McCain and Barack Obama.

Polls show Canadians are heavily rooting for Obama regardless of age, gender, province, and political affiliation. An interesting poll asked Canadians who they most admire among the leaders mentioned below. The results were as follows:

* Barack Obama: 26 pc
* Stephen Harper (Current Canadian Prime Minister and Conservative leader): 21 pc
* Hillary Clinton: 16 pc
* Jack Layton (Current NDP leader): 9 pc
* Gilles Duceppe (Current Bloc Quebecois leader): 6 pc
* Stephane Dion (Current Liberal leader): 5 pc
* John McCain: 3 pc

I think Canadians are hungry for any change after George Bush and would see either Obama or McCain as a major improvement over the current administration on both management of foreign affairs and the economy. The prospect of the first African American president (and when Hillary was in the race the prospect of the first female President) is a story that is also interesting to many Canadians. I think McCain is personally respected in Canada but his party is affiliated with the record of Bush who's approval ratings in Canada are much lower than the historic lows we are seeing in the United States.

Why do you think so much of the world is blogging about U.S. politics?

The world is hungry for leadership. Who is going to save the earth from global warming? Who is going to prevent a global recession? Who is going to stop the genocide in Sudan? Who is going to bring peace between Israelis and Palestinians? Who is going to deal with Iraq, Syria, Iran, China, Russia and North Korea? Who will do something for those living in extreme poverty in Africa and elsewhere? Who will fight for democracy, human rights and fundamental freedoms? George Bush has alienated most of the world with his stance on the environment, the war in Iraq and a series of other issues. Rising powers in China, India, Brazil, Russia and elsewhere are challenging American influence in the world and it is important for the next President to repair strained relationships with the rest of the world and restore its rightful role as a leader on many of the issues activist bloggers around the world care about.

Have you had many reactions to your blog from Americans? If so, what were they?

A couple of Americans have commented that I should butt out of US politics, but most are just interested in discussing the issues and candidates I tend to write about. Any post about Ron Paul seems to draw a lot of comments from American readers demonstrating his internet following. The biggest debate on my blog has been among Canadian Conservatives who are split between McCain and Obama.

Why do you think so much of the world supports Obama?

He represents change from George Bush and politics in general, he has the potential to be the first African American president, his words are inspiring and he represents a more multilateral approach to world issues. Obama's willingness to talk with Americas enemies, his opposition to the Iraq war and his environmental policies are also likely well received in many places around the world. I think the world is as frustrated with George Bush as most Americans. For a lot of young people, he also represents generational change and a spirit of unity as oppose to the division we have seen over the past 7 years. Obama represents the American dream and all that is great about the United States. John McCain is well respected and has a great story as well, but unfortunately he is tied to the Republican brand that is not popular inside or outside the United States.

If you could vote in the U.S. general elections, who would you vote for?

I have an American cousin serving in Iraq and another in the navy stationed in the Persian Gulf. In Canada I also have a couple of cousins fighting in the Afghanistan war. In the case of Iraq, I would like to see the troops come home as soon as possible. In Afghanistan I would like to see more American troops to support our Canadian troops in what has been seen by many as the forgotten war. Personally I would vote for change and for me it would have came down to either Ron Paul or Barack Obama. While Ron Paul is closest to my personal views, Barack Obama would get my vote based on the two choices that are currently available. I am excited about his message of change, unity and his positions on foreign affairs. If I was an American I might be concerned about what he would do with regards to taxes, government spending and issues where his lack of experience might hurt him. Having said that, I think John McCain would represent a third term for George Bush's foreign and economic policies despite the fact he has proven to be a maverick in the past and certainly could be considered a strong friend to Canada.

In terms of running mates, I predict Barack Obama will eventually select Hillary Clinton. I think after earning 18 million votes and campaigning hard for well over a year she deserves the spot more than the other options available. She brings some experience, ensures party unity and deserves credit for bringing a lot of the excitement into the Democratic primaries. I also think if he picks someone besides Hillary, that person will be compared to Hillary and the pick will be constantly debated in the media and among Democratic supporters. A Obama/Clintons ticket would be unstoppable in my opinion. I do not think it would be worth the risk of the Obama campaign going off message by picking someone else unless he is concerned about shoring up his national security or economic credentials. If I was John McCain, I would go with Condi Rice who is clearly the biggest rising star in the Republican Party, has the strongest experience, would be ready to step into the job right on day one and is also rumoured to be a maverick or moderate within the Bush administration. I think in the end he will pick Mitt Romney because McCain admits himself that he is not strong on the economy and that will be the ballot box issue; not Iraq come November. Schwarzenegger or Powell would be great fantasy picks for McCain, but Schwarznegger was not born in America and cannot be VP while it is unclear at this point who Powell will be supporting in November.

From the perspective of a Canadian, I look forward to watching Americans democratically elect their own leader this fall and I expect that Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper will work well with either President Barack Obama or President John McCain. Canadians and Americans have great relations and I look forward to that continuing even if from time to time we disagree on some of the issues. There are a lot of challenges to face and the world is excited about the next President restoring America's image and leadership in the world during these difficult times. God bless America.

When a 25-year-old Manhattan graduate student who was assaulted Tuesday night got dressed that morning, she probably didn’t anticipate that her T-shirt would provoke four teens into shoving her, pulling out her earphones and spitting in her face.

Then again, with a shirt sporting the slogan, “Obama is my slave,” it may have been wise to consider the possibility.
Now she’s suing the $69 shirt’s designer, Apollo Braun, for “all he’s got,” the designer claims.
But the Israeli-born Braun — born Doron Braunshtein — says what allegedly happened to his now-disgruntled customer isn’t his fault — and that his outrageous design reflects not his views but those of “ordinary WASPs.”

Post extendido - Leer más 'Ay the Hipster Irony (and Racism).'...

The woman bought a $69 shirt from Apollo Braun's Manhattan boutique that bore the words, “Obama is my slave.” When she wore the shirt on Tuesday, four teenage girls accosted her - shoving her, pulling out her earphones, and spitting in her face, according to the New York edition of Metro News. The unnamed woman is reportedly seeking solace by suing Braun - born Doron Braunshtein - for “all he's got,” the designer claims. He, of course, is shirking any responsibility for the incident and says that the shirt reflects the views of “ordinary WASPs.”

“For a lot of people, when they see Obama, they see a slave. People think America is not ready for a black president,” the Israeli-born designer said. “I can’t stand Obama,” Braun says, but claims that it's not because the candidate is black. “That’s the only thing I like about him. He opens the door for other minorities.”

“He reminds me of Adolf Hitler,” Braun explained, adding he does not like the Illinois senator because “he is a Muslim” — a myth that Obama apparently cannot escape. The designer has sold several other anti-Obama styles from his boutique, including shirts with slogans such as “Jews Against Obama,” “Obama = Hitler” and “Who Killed Obama?”

“She speaks fluent Spanish, with a Dominican accent, and looks Latina,”

I couldn't find a video of Soetoro-Ng speaking Spanish but listen to how she says "Barack".

Post extendido - Leer más 'Does Obama's Hermana Look Like an Hermana?'...