Racial Politics in US elections

The Terrorist Barack Hussein Obama

By FRANK RICH

Published: October 11, 2008, The New York Times Op-Ed

.........
There are no black faces high in the McCain hierarchy to object to these tactics. There hasn’t been a single black Republican governor, senator or House member in six years. This is a campaign where Palin can repeatedly declare that Alaska is “a microcosm of America” without anyone even wondering how that might be so for a state whose tiny black and Hispanic populations are each roughly one-third the national average. There are indeed so few people of color at McCain events that a black senior writer from The Tallahassee Democrat was mistakenly ejected by the Secret Service from a campaign rally in Panama City in August, even though he was standing with other reporters and showed his credentials. His only apparent infraction was to look glaringly out of place.
Could the old racial politics still be determinative? I’ve long been skeptical of the incessant press prognostications (and liberal panic) that this election will be decided by racist white men in the Rust Belt. Now even the dimmest bloviators have figured out that Americans are riveted by the color green, not black — as in money, not energy. Voters are looking for a leader who might help rescue them, not a reckless gambler whose lurching responses to the economic meltdown (a campaign “suspension,” a mortgage-buyout stunt that changes daily) are as unhinged as his wanderings around the debate stage.

N-deal: Bush allays Indian concerns over fuel supply, reprocessing

Thu, Oct 9 07:02 AM

Washington, Oct 9 (IANS) President George W. Bush has sought to allay India's concerns over nuclear fuel assurances and reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel with an assertion that the enabling US law does not change the terms of the bilateral 123 Agreement.

"The legislation does not change the terms of the 123 Agreement as I submitted it to the Congress," said Bush in what the White House described as a "Statement by the President on the Occasion of Signing H.R. 7081," which had added a couple of riders in ratifying the India-US civil nuclear deal.

"That Agreement is consistent with the Atomic Energy Act and other elements of US law. This legislation is important as it enables me to bring the 123 Agreement into force and to accept on behalf of the United States the obligations contained in the Agreement,' Bush said.

"The Agreement grants India advance consent to reprocessing which will be brought into effect upon conclusion of arrangements and procedures for a dedicated reprocessing facility under IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) safeguards,' he stated

more 

Manmohan, Pranab differ on N-deal with US: Natwar

Monday, May 26, 2008
Manmohan, Pranab differ on N-deal: Natwar

New Delhi: There are differences in the way Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and his External Affairs Minister, Pranab Mukherjee, see the much-discussed India-US civilian nuclear deal, former foreign minister Natwar Singh has said.

"The prime minister says the deal is on and they will get it through but when Mukherjee is asked about it there is a big question mark. Mukherjee has even said the deal is not going to pass," Natwar Singh told IANS in an interview.

When told that it was Mukherjee who is selling the deal to the Left parties on behalf of the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance (UPA), Natwar Singh said: "Much depends on how enthusiastic he himself is about the deal."

The India-US civilian nuclear deal has run into rough weather with the Left parties - who lend outside support to the UPA government - opposing it. The main opposition party, Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), is also opposed to the deal in its present form.

The US government has repeatedly told the Indian government that time may be running out for the deal to materialise as the George Bush presidency enters its last leg ahead of polls.

"The UPA government has gone about the deal in the wrong manner. When it knew that parliament would not approve it, it should not have gone ahead," said Natwar Singh, who was external affairs minister in the Manmohan Singh cabinet till December 2005. He was succeeded by Pranab Mukherjee.

Natwar Singh had to resign when he, and his son Jagat Singh, were named beneficiaries by a UN inquiry committee headed by Paul Volcker in an Iraqi oil scam.

The former minister said the draft of the civilian nuclear deal had undergone several drastic changes since he first saw and approved it as external affairs minister on July 18, 2005. "Manmohan Singh and I saw it during our visit to Washington. I supported it then for two reasons. One, it tacitly recognised India as a nuclear power. And two, it was energy-oriented."

Natwar Singh said the term energy was later downplayed and non-proliferation was emphasised. "There were no questions about the 123 agreement, the Hyde Act, or the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspections then," he said. "The US has shifted the goalpost several times," he said, adding: "I don't see the deal going through".

Natwar Singh, who was in the Indian Foreign Service (IFS) before joining the Congress, said: "The United States is selling this deal to us in an attempt to pitch us against China. We should not fall for it. (US President) George Bush has tried to sell it so that he can claim it as an achievement.

But the next US president is not going to endorse it, whether it is John McCain (Republican candidate) or Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama (Democrat frontrunners)."


Source: IANS