Obama – The Daily Opinion

On the Right to Bear Arms

It’s at times like this when I can feel every inch of the 3,675 miles that separate London from Washington DC. Oakland, Aurora, Oak Creek, New York City, Minneapolis, Brookfield, Newtown, New York, Chicago – and that’s just a small selection of 2012’s mass shootings (you can read about some more here). I could fill this entire article with the names of the wounded and the dead. It’s almost too much to take in. Never has the American anti-gun lobby had more ammunition. And yet, as it stands, I’m more inclined to despair for it than to hope.

What took place at Sandy Hook Elementary School was beyond nauseating, beyond horrific. Another mass murder, another gun-wielding maniac, another tragedy. The day itself may not have been about politics, but its aftermath should be. And when Newtown is finally left, out of sight of the cameras and the speculators, to pick up the pieces, I wonder what – if anything at all – will have changed.

“We can’t accept events like this as routine,” President Obama intoned in the wake of the shootings, “Are we really prepared to say that we are powerless in the face of such carnage?” Obama’s emotional barometer was spot on, but what of his political one? Sadly, the promise of “meaningful action” can only be received with a dose of cynicism; we’ve seen it one too many times.

After the near-fatal shooting of Gabrielle Giffords at Tucson, the President assured the public that there would be a “national conversation… about everything from the merits of gun safety laws to the adequacy of our mental-health system”. There was no conversation. After the Aurora cinema murders, many pleaded for a debate about the laws that allowed James Holmes to own the semi-automatic rifle, shotgun and handgun with which he massacred 12 people and injured many more. There was no debate. Change has been slower than glacial.

So what more can we expect now? US gun laws are as lax as ever: the ban on assault weapons ended in 2004; Republicans, with all their links to the NRA, currently dominate the House of Representatives; and recently, the state of Michigan passed a bill which means that people will be able to carry concealed guns into schools (including classrooms and dormitories), bars, hospitals, places of worship and entertainment venues. And all this with the knowledge that 15 of the 25 worst mass shootings of the last half-century have taken place in the Land of the Free, with the knowledge that five of the 11 deadliest American shootings have taken place since 2007.

Still the pro-gun lobby won’t concede defeat. Still they persist with their “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” nonsense, even when the statistics belie their beliefs. It’s no secret that the US has a gun problem: 2009 saw 11,500 gun-related homicides, 554 unintentional deaths and 45,000 non-fatal assaults. With 88.8 guns for every 100 citizens in 2007 according to the Small Arms Survey, the USA has more firearms per person than any other country in the world – almost double the number of Yemen, the country in second place. But at the same time, this is a country where the NRA (a group of over 4 million members) could throw $2.9 million into its campaigns in 2011 alone, ten times the amount its opponents could muster.

It’s hardly a surprise, then, that the Second Amendment continues to be treated as sacred. Not when Republican Louie Gohmert isn’t the only one wishing that there had been more guns, not less, at Sandy Hook: “I wish to God [that the principal, Dawn Hochsprung] had had an M-4 in her office… so when she heard the gunfire, she pulls it out… and takes his head off before he can kill those precious kids”. Not when radio host Alex Jones isn’t alone in baselessly refiguring the events, with extraordinary conviction, as a conspiracy, a staged shooting designed to demonise gun owners’ rights. Not when Larry Pratt, head of the 300,000-strong Gun Owners of America, isn’t the only one who thinks that it’s the gun control supporters who “have the blood of little children on their hands”.

Perhaps the pervasiveness of such pig-headedness – opposed as it is to any debate over Second Amendment rights – is the reason why the words ‘gun control’ weren’t even whispered in the presidential campaign. They’re not, after all, vote-winning words. It’s by no means realistic to expect guns to be outlawed overnight; views are far too entrenched for that – the very fact that events like Newtown prompt Americans, absurdly, to bulk-buy assault weapons (without a moment’s hesitation) for fear of them being banned says it all.

And the fear isn’t unwarranted; it’s recently been announced that Obama supports proposals to outlaw assault weapons with the kind of federal law that expired in 2004. For the safety of the countless American lives at risk, you’d better damn well hope he means it. For as long as the Second Amendment and all its implications remain undebated, unchallenged, unexamined, heinous massacres like Columbine, like Virginia Tech, like Newtown will keep happening with the regularity of clockwork.

No longer is Barack Obama fishing for votes; and no longer is he seeking re-election. And though he’s up against a powerful pressure group indeed, now is the time for him to fulfil his promises. As Paul Waldman and Jaime Fuller wrote so incisively in The American Prospect, Obama may have reacted to the Sandy Hook tragedy as a parent, but he must act as a president. Then, and only then, will we be justified in having the audacity to hope for change.

We wouldn’t have Romney, so why would they?

As Romney takes his campaign overseas for the first time, his behaviour alongside his campaign history highlights aspects of not just Republican politics, but American politics as a whole that would seem completely alien to those in the UK.

If you’re a resident of the United Kingdom (or perhaps anywhere that isn’t the USA) you might have been aware of the Republican frontman’s undiplomatic doubts about Britain and its ability to host the Olympics, just a day before the Opening Ceremony was to begin. Far from being the end of the world, or even his campaign for that matter, the implications, reactions and reasons revolving this apparent ‘blunder’ say more about the alien world of American politics than possibly anything in recent memory. So the question is, if we’ve heard so much of his ‘gaffes’, why aren’t we declaring Obama the victor already?

First of all, it’s important to remember that despite the UK tabloid’s ferocious attacks, or the London Mayor’s mockery, the USA (and largely the world) has really struggled to give a shit. To put it into perspective, the man on his first campaign trip abroad couldn’t even get our country’s name right, calling it England – the virtual equivalent of calling the United States ‘Texas’. But why? Surely the man challenging the incumbent for the post of “Leader of the Free World” shouldn’t be pissing off its ‘greatest ally’ on his first trip to meet and greet? Breaking news, if anything – his Olympics ‘gaffe’ only made his journey to the White House an easier one. No, I’m not even joking. Take a look at the video below to see what I’m talking about, pay attention to the penultimate reason specifically.

To an average Brit, the denouncing of an ally’s Olympic opening ceremony tied with the inability to remember their name would almost run them out of town. Being perceived as unprofessional and incompetent, the British press and electorate would jump on them like a rabid dog. Granted, the video example is a little white trash, a little far-right and a little… well, bonkers (“we don’t know where he comes from” – try America). But in reality it says a sizable amount not just about American priorities, but staunch Republican values – y’know, the values that will probably see him carried into the White House. To hard-line Conservatives, this is America at its best – crass, proud and uncaring. The American right cares little for nitty-gritty foreign policy and the concerns of other sovereign nations, if anything their only priority is parading around American exceptionalism wherever they can, proving still that the United States is No.1, and more importantly always will be.

Perhaps unsurprisingly so, as this election (unlike those of the Bush era) will be the most distant from foreign policy there have been in recent memory. Struggling with a troubled economy, the already insular American public and media have become ever more focused on their domestic financial problems, healthcare controversy and gas prices (often a symbol of freedom in the vast landscape of the USA).

But if your first impressions of the American political landscape were an electorate tolerant (even accepting) of incompetence, you’re still not completely wrong.

Mitt Romney has proved himself to flip-flop on vital issues to the American public and his Conservative supporters, not just once, but time and time again. Vietnam, stem cell research, Reagan (something of a Conservative hero), abortion, ‘Obamacare’ (a system he originally instituted in his state of Massachusetts, now promising to repeal nationwide if he were to win), even small and apparently meaningless facts. At best, he has a memory disorder, at worst he’s a desperate unempathetic suit who’ll say just about anything to get in the White House. Just a quick reminder, this is the man who’ll control the biggest nuclear arsenal in the world, have the strongest diplomatic clout and head the world’s only superpower. Question is, do the American public (more specifically the ones who’ll be voting for him) even know of his flip-flop endeavors? Chances not.

Unlike the UK, the United States has news coverage that quite obviously favours one political view over another. Fox, despite its ability to perpetuate an array of quality American films and entertainment around the globe, has possibly the most biased news network in the Western world. But unlike the rest of us, America simultaneously sees Fox as the second most trusted news network in the country whilst also being the top untrusted network too. This alone is a testament to just how divisive their news coverage is. Most revealing of all is the political affiliations of those who trusted, and those who did not trust the station.

A TV News Poll by Public Polling Policy revealed 72% of Conservatives trusted the Fox News coverage, while 82% of Liberals didn’t. And considering that Fox has been under the spotlight for allegations of conservative bias several times, it’s understandable why those who share the political slant of the coverage are those who favour the channel the most. Considering this, it is also understandable to see why those who are most likely to vote for Romney in 2012 are those who would be least likely to know about his ever-changing stance on important issues. Ironically, the Presidential Candidate for the Democratic party in 2004, John Kerry, was hounded for being an apparent flip flopper in his race against George W Bush. And more revealing still is how Fox News has absolutely no mention of Romney’s same crime. It’s easy to see how this withholding of information in order to make your chosen candidate appear the superior is the perfect breeding ground for an uninformed and unfair election – with the American electorate paying the biggest price for it.

I might find BBC News, Sky News, ITV News and all the rest slightly cold and stoic in comparison to their American counterparts. But in order to have a more intelligent and informed debate about who’ll lead my country in the years to come, I’m willing to sacrifice a bit of showmanship in my news coverage. And in order to truly understand the American political landscape, you must understand that Romney’s hopes of entering the White House rest largely on a ‘free’ press. A press free to say whatever the fuck it wants.

News in Briefs 24/06/12

Greek elections bringing about pretty much the same stuff as before, education changes, coalition splits, more chuntering from Ed Miliband, and a Syrian Civil War that people have stopped caring about. It’s been a busy week so it’s time to get started. Although I hope this column won’t include most of that stuff, if I’m lucky!

Political Oops of the Week

Away from Syria and the same old stuff from the Eurozone, we now move to Egypt once again. It’s been a long time since much of relevance happened in Egypt, but after the military rulers dissolved the entire parliament last weekend things started to move forward again. So this week they then introduced new powers for themselves. To put it simply, they can now control the budget, implement new legislation (as governed by themselves), and the president now doesn’t really exist in any real capacity despite the fact the leader of the Muslim Brotherhood won fair and square.

This pretty much reminds me of how most dictatorships are created. The military tends to always back a dictator and this is how they do it. The only difference is that the military happens to have a ruler from its own brotherhood, as opposed to an outsider leading it.

On the plus side, at least that bed-ridden bastard Mubarak is about to go to the great hospital bed on Satan’s right nipple.

The Painful…

This was quite a recent YouGov poll conducted in the US. It basically said that 63% of all high level Republicans still believe that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) when they invaded it in 2003. This was compared to 15% of Democrats. So you’re telling me that the most powerful country in the Western world should be governed by a party like the Republicans who have a majority of people that believe that WMDs existed in Iraq in 2003? And this is despite the fact that solid evidence consisting of first-hand accounts are arguing for the opposite.

I don’t like to believe that all Americans are complete and utter morons, but the politicians certainly are. Not only do they operate a system that favours only the multi-millionaires, due to the lack of any controls on campaign spending, but it’s an example that a lot of rich people really do live sheltered lives. I hope for the sake of the entire Western world that Obama receives a second term in the White House. But the problem is I honestly do think that he will get voted out, and we will all be left regretting that.

…And the Pointless

Zimbabwean MPs have decided to undergo circumcision as part of a campaign to reduce the prevalence of AIDS in the country. In 2009 Unicef reported that around 14% of the adult population had either HIV or full-blown AIDS. I can understand that the National Trust says that you can reduce AIDS by up to 60% by getting circumcised. However, what gets me is how we prevent the same problem in the West. We don’t mutilate our own cocks in order to prevent it. It just seems to be extreme and unnecessary. Surely a better idea to reduce those Unicef statistics would be to just use a little common sense and just stop having so much sex with strangers? Those statistics will go down by themselves if people just use a little responsibility and common sense.

Oh wait, common sense is in short supply these days isn’t it?

The So Outrageous that it’s Borderline Hilarious

Jimmy Carr is the subject of this section this week as his story really is fitting. Let’s look at the facts. Jimmy Carr utilises a legal yet slightly unethical loophole to bring his tax bill down to single figures, when realistically it should be nearer 50%. For those who don’t understand how he did this, I’ll explain the general process. This scheme, which many figures like the members of Take That are using, is all about creating an off-shore company. The way it works is that they send the money to the company and they then have it loaned back to them immediately. When it comes to loans there’s no tax attached to them so he’s essentially getting the same amount of money without paying any tax at all.

So this week he apologised. I watched his shows and he did get heckled quite a bit, but the most surprising thing is that he was actually being cheered for everything despite the fact that what he did was still blatantly wrong. He never had to pay back any of this money and now the matter is supposedly closed.

It really does amaze me how fickle some people are. We’ll complain about bankers and multinational companies doing this sort of thing for hours and hours on end, but when Jimmy Carr does it then all it takes is a crap apology and that’s the end of the matter. Come on!

Anyway, maybe next week won’t be as bleak and irritating after all…