After the American Century

Santorum On Top in New Polls

2012-02-14T17:11:00.002+01:00

After the American Century

Since Santorum's triple victory last week a number of polls have shown his support rocketing up to the top position. In an average of all the recent polls, he has just over 30%, and he is about 3% ahead of Romney. Moreover, Santorum wins ALL of the polls, whether conducted by Pew Research or the New York Times. Just eight days ago this result would have seemed improbable.

Meanwhile Gingrich seems to have had his moment in the sun, falling in the same polls to about 16%. Moreover, the trend is downward, as he gets only 10% in the most recent one. Since Gingrich is nearly broke, he has had to stop most campaigning to raise money. He vows to keep going, and almost certainly will be using his energies to attack Romney, though he is an unpredictable man.

Romney hardly needs to worry about this, but suddenly neither does Santorum. He received more than $1 million a day in the first days after his stunning victories last week. Moreover, suddenly all the journalists and TV stations want to talk with him.

And just to make it harder for anyone to achieve a majority, Ron Paul keeps chugging along. He came in a close second to Romney in Maine. Romney should have been able to win easily there, as Maine was once a part of Massachusetts and has many similarities with next door New Hampshire, where Romney won.

In short, things remain unstable and interesting at least until March 6, or Super Tuesday. Here is the schedule of the primaries and caucuses to come.

February
21:Wisconsin Primary
28:Arizona Primary
Michigan Primary

March

3: Washington caucuses

6: Alaska caucuses
Georgia Primary
Idaho caucuses
Massachusetts Primary
North Dakota caucuses
Ohio Primary
Oklahoma Primary
Tennessee Primary
Vermont Primary
Virginia Primary

Election 2012: Passion Trumps Money - Santorum Resurgent in Minnesota, Colorado, and Missouri

2012-02-08T06:16:00.001+01:00

After the American Century

A week is a long time in American politics. Two weeks ago Gingrich trounced Romney, and he seemed the emerging leader. One week ago Romney trounced Gingrich in Florida, and many pundits were saying that the race was all but over. Now this week Santorum has won not just one state but three, all in a single night. Minnesota, Missouri, and Colorado have all spoken with one voice. The Republicans there like the former Senator from Pennsylvania. This should not be such a surprise, because Santorum began this campaign with a strong showing in the Iowa heartland that turned into a victory on the recount.

In the heartland they do not much like Romney. Perhaps it is because evangelicals are uncomfortable with his Mormonism. Perhaps it is because a rich investor is not their kind of guy. Perhaps he just does not pass the famous "beer test" - i.e. which of these candidates would the average voter most want to sit down and have a beer with? Romney, as a faithful Mormon, does not drink, suggesting that he is ultimately unelectable.

Samtorum has not won narrow victories. In Minnesota he had more votes than the next two candidates combined, with Romney running a weak third at just 16%. In Missouri Romney did somewhat better, with 25% of the vote, but Santorum also was stronger there, with 55% of the votes as I write this, with final results still pending. Colorado is still counting, but it seems that Santorum's win there is also assured, but the precise percentages are not yet forthcoming. With a third of the vote counted, Santorum has 42%, Romney 30%, and Gingrich 15%. Gingrich commented on these results, saying that Romney's attack advertising had hurt him and given Santorum a chance.

Ron Paul also remains in the race, and can be encouraged by the fact that he beat Romney in Minnesota, to finish second. In Missouri and Colorado, however, he was last.

What do Santorum's victories mean? One way to get a grip on the race is to look at the delegate count, where Romney still has a commanding lead. But another, more important aspect of the situation is less tangible: momentum. Romney is losing it and Santorum is getting it. The Senator's supporters are passionate, and they have brought him these victories even though Romney spent far more money on advertising. But in caucuses passion trumps money every time.

Election 2012: The Long Game

2012-02-01T17:43:00.002+01:00

After the American Century

So Romney has won Florida just as convincingly as Gingrich won South Carolina. But the race is not over. Far from it, for to win the nomination requires more than 1000 delegates, and Romeny has less than 100. Nevertheless, Romeny does have more money than his three rivals combined, and he has a strong organization up and running in each state. He was able to outspend Gingrich 5 to 1 in attack advertising, and Gingrich now has used up most of the millions he got from a Las Vegas casino owner and his wife. He claims to be a grassroots candidate, but so far the grassroots have not been sending in much money.

But Gingrich does have support in the Old South. He won in the Florida panhandle, which is the most southern part of that state, culturally speaking, precisely because it is the most northern part of the state, settled and developed by slaveholding families who joined in the Civil War. And Gingrich also can expect to do well in the primaries and caucuses of other southern states, such as his own Georgia, Alabama, etc. If he can also do well in the Mountain West, then Romney will have to outlast him.

For Gingrich the best scenario would be that Santorum soon drops out, due to lack of money and failure to do well since Iowa. His supporters would likely move to Gingrich, even if some of them might have to hold their noses to do so. On the other hand, Santorum may feel it is worth remaining in the race a while longer. He is not working at anything else, having lost his seat in the Senate, and by running he keeps himself before the nation, perhaps as a potential VP nominee. He may think that there is the possibility that Romney and Gingrich will discredit each other and Santorum can emerge as the alternative.

And there is a big problem with Romney, from the point of view of a general election. The list of who gave money to his enormous PAC fund is now available for public scrutiny. It turns out the overwhelming majority of his backers are money men, investors, hedge-fund executives, and the link. Speculators. The very people who profited from the collapse of the economy. Americans are not exactly in love with bankers and hedge-funds at the moment. Not only did Romney run one of them, but people of this kind provide almost all of his campaign money. Many of them gave $1 million each. Expect Gingrich to remind the electorate. Often.

Meanwhile, Ron Paul keeps chugging along, with his 15% or so, which could become a factor at the National Convention. Imagine a scenario where neither Gringrich nor Romney has enough delegates, and they have to offer something to Paul to get his votes behind them on a second or third ballot.

In short, this contest has the potential to last into the summer, especially if Gingrich can raise some money. The month of February is somewhat quieter than January, with just caucuses, and the focus shifts now to the longer game, with the first big test coming on Super Tuesday in March. Romney's money could be quite telling, as he will be able to saturate the airwaves of all the states with negative advertising, as he did in Florida. The many simultaneous primaries could be a decisive turning point. But then again, it might prolong the Republican agony and keep entertaining us until summer.

Review: Donald Hall, Unpacking the Boxes

2012-01-31T04:54:00.000+01:00

After the American Century

I have just finished reading Donald Hall's fine memoir, Unpacking the Boxes (Houghton Mifflin, 2008). It is a fitting conclusion to the autobiographical vein in his work that began with his first book, String too Short to be Saved (1961). That book was about his summers on the New Hampshire farm where he helped his maternal grandparents. This one begins outside of New Haven, where his father worked as an accountant for a milk company owned by his grandfather. As so often happens, his two parents came from quite different worlds. In New Haven his mother drank cocktails and sought to emulate the middle class of the late 1920s and early 1930s. In New Hampshire, however, his mother felt at home, and soon, her son found that he preferred it as well.

Unpacking the Boxes was written from that same New Hampshire farm, which Hall inherited and moved into back in the 1970s. There he literally unpacks the boxes that contain every memento of his early life. This awakened memories of his early childhood and awakening to poetry. Even before he reached high school, Hall was passionately interested in words and writing, and his descriptions of his early embrace of the Muse is entwined with his equally passionate pursuit of girls. He admits that one of the attractions of being a poet when young was that young ladies found it quite appealing.

Hall proved a seriously productive writer, with, by my count, 15 books of poetry, two biographies, three plays, a dozen children's books, two collections of short stories, and six autobiographical works.

Hall spent two years at Exeter Academy, where his father sent him, determined that his only son should have any career he liked, and not waste another life entombed in the family dairy business. Young Hall was a prodigious worker, who already knew he wanted to be a poet. At Exeter, he steadily rose from almost failing grades in Latin and several other subjects to very high marks, winning a place at Harvard, where he also excelled. From there he had an enviable string of fellowships, with two years at Oxford, a year at Stanford, and then three more years at Harvard. In these student years he met many of the major poets of the generation ahead of him, such as Richard Wilbur and John Ciardi. Already by the time he reached Oxford he was something of a personage, taking on an editorial role as well as writing. He became a close friend of George Plimpton and at a young age was editor of poetry for his Paris Review. (The major poets whom he got to know at this time, notably Robert Frost, are the subject of another Hall memoir, Remembering Poets that I highly recommend.)

Hall might have said more about the confrontation between the Beat poets and the more classical or traditional poets, among whom Hall was a leader. Their differences were more poetical than political. Hall was Left leaning all through his career, and he admired the work of Walt Whitman, even if initially far more drawn to the great English Romantics such as Keats and the metaphysical poets. He belonged to that generation who felt it necessary to have read all the predecessors. At Harvard, for each weekly tutorial with Harry Levin he was to have read ALL the poetry by one person, William Blake for example, and be ready to discuss it intensely for an hour alone with the professor.

Hall's own work did change after his encounter with the Beat Generation, even if he remained closer to the classical tradition. I did not know that Hall became close friends with Robert Bly at Harvard, and their friendship endured to the present. I should have realized, because I did know that each of them went to Harvard, but somehow I never made the connection. Likewise, Hall was close to Galway Kinnell. These writers were closer in sensibility to the Beats, and their connection to him rightly suggests that Hall was not doctrinaire in his aesthetics. He knew and loved quality, and long before they were famous befriended the important emerging writers in the British Isles such as Ted Hughes and Seamus Heaney, as well.

In its first half, this is primarily an intellectual autobiography about a poet's coming of age. Then it divides c. 1970 when his first marriage fell apart. Yet another of Hall's books has already treated this middle period of his life in detail so he skips through it rather schematically, covering his arrival in Ann Arbor where he taught for the better part of a decade in far more detail than the decision to leave academia. He liked teaching but he longed to be a writer full time and managed to do this. In good part it was possible because he was so fortunate as to inherit the house and because he had a steady income from a good deal of prose writing. Notably, he wrote a fine book that I used myself in teaching writing, back in the early 1970s. Appropriately titled Writing Well, it remains one of the best introductory texts one can find.

The last half of the book is much darker than the first, colored by the long illness and death of his second wife, the poet Jane Kenyon, who passed away in 1995. She was 19 years younger than he, and Hall was devastated by the loss. The book is not light reading, as it describes how he remains in the house surrounded by constant reminders of her. He visits the grave every day for more than a year, and can speak of nothing else. At the same time, his own health is failing. Born in 1928, he was 70 by the time he had even begun to recover a normal life. He soon began to suffer many frailties, and it was apparently a trial for him to complete the memoir at all.

In part this is because just as Hall reached what he called "The Planet of Antiquity" he received the great, but also greatly demanding, honor of being named Poet Laureate of the United States. This entails many exhausting public appearances and interviews. The gratification of attention was almost outweighed by the demands it made on a man who could not walk without a cane and fell many times when attempting the stairs. But he survived the glorious ordeal and this book saw the light.

There is much more in Unpacking the Boxes, which ideally should be read after String too Short to Be Saved. The title of that first book also came from something found in an attic, a box of snippets of string, with a label on the box that read, "String too short to be saved." It is from such detritus that Hall has made this presumably final memoir, and the title might almost have been recycled. Fine as the work is, there will still be something for the eventual biographers, as Hall has not written much in these memoirs about the actual poems he published. This has the "virtue" that one can enjoy Unpacking the Boxes without knowing anything of Hall's poetry, which then awaits as a further literary adventure.

Election 2012: The Second Florida Debate

2012-01-27T05:26:00.000+01:00

After the American Century

The second Florida debate is over, and it appears that Romney is suddenly a stronger debater. He has a new coach, and he was far more aggressive and convincing than before. Based on the debate alone, Romney seemed more credible and competent. Indeed, at several points he wiped the floor with Gingrich.

Based on this performance, many of the pundits now think that Newt may not be able to win in Florida. Moreover, new polls suggest that Obama would thrash Gingrich by almost 20 points. Many leading Republicans have said that he would not be the right man. The momentum seems to have shifted, in short. Yet one of the most recent national polls does show Gingrich leading Romney 31 to 27%. And think about this. When either Paul or Santorum drops out, their voters are more likely to shift over to Gingrich than to Romney.

What about those two other candidates? Both Santorum and Paul had a good night. So long as they are in the race no one will be able to amass a majority of the Republican delegates to the convention. So much has happened already,that we cannot assume that the selection process is soon going to be over.

Meanwhile, the Republican candidates speak, with no sense of irony, of "self deportation" as a solution to the illegal immigrant problem. Newt Gingrich wants English to be "the official language of government" as if it were not already rather the case. There was an absurd discussion about deporting illegal grandmothers. They speak so seriously and their audience of true Republican believers is so enthusiastic, one can forget that much of what is being discussed is nonsense.

Let the fun continue, just do not take them too seriously.

Obama's Popularity Surges After State of the Union

2012-01-26T03:39:00.001+01:00

After the American Century

President Obama gave a crucial "state of the union" message last night, and hit a home run. His approval ratings have shot up to an unbelievable level, with 91% of Americans saying they approved his proposals for helping the economy. He looks ready to tell a more populist story than before, and it seems to be working. It was a powerful speech, and if you have not seen it, have a listen. If you want a quick summary, as one pundit put it, "Due to my policies, Bin Laden is dead, and GM is alive."

Meanwhile, the Republicans have a problem. Their Mitt Romney had to confess that he makes $57,000 every single day, more than $20 million a year. This was according to the tax returns that he was forced to release by popular demand. He would have had to reveal his income if he became the candidate, but he ended up releasing the information the day that Obama was criticizing the rich for being irresponsible and avoiding paying their fair share of the taxes.

So where is Romney's money and how is it that he pays less than 14% in federal tax, about half the rate for the average American? It turns out Romney has some millions in tax havens, like the Caymen Islands, and in Swiss bank accounts. He is also the beneficiary of low tax rates on capital gains (from sale of stocks) - low rates put in place by the Republicans, of course. It appears that there is nothing actually illegal in the Romney tax records, but they are rather alarming. One begins to understand why he could offer to bet Rick Perry $10,000 about who was right on a particular issue. Ten grand is what Romney makes every six hours, even when sleeping, for not working.

The only problem Obama has now is that Romney may fold. Gingrich is running well ahead in national Republican polls, and slightly ahead or even in Florida, depending on the poll. So Romney is being attacked by both the right in his party and by the Democrats. Obama is betting that Gingrich would be easier to beat, and that it therefore is better to hammer Romney out of the way, leaving the President as the only one on the center ground.

The election will be decided by the moderates in each party and by the Independents, and all the indicators are that Obama is winning them over.Gingrich, by comparison, is much further to the right and bragging about it. One begins to sense doom for the Republicans now, unless they find an entirely new candidate at the last minute, which is very hard to do given the primary system.

Election 2012: Wealthy Republican Candidates: One Angry, One Cold

2012-01-21T16:08:00.000+01:00

After the American Century

South Carolina is voting as I write, and all the polls suggest that Gingrich is likely to win, or to come close to winning. A sampling of polls suggests that Gingrich might win by 4%, but the margin of error and the volatility of the public makes this prediction a bit dubious. But the momentum is on Gingrich's side, as he has come from a deficit of more than 10 percentage points to take the lead. Romney will not be able to capture the nomination easily.

The coming vote in Florida will test the Republican Party further. Romney and Gingrich do not just represent different political views. There is considerable animosity between them, and it is fueled by a barrage of negative advertising, from both sides. The longer the campaign lasts, the more divided the Republicans will become, and the fault lines are not merely between Gingrich and Romney The Ron Paul stalwarts show no sign of losing enthusiasm for their man, who keeps alive a libertarianism that can never really compromise with Romney and has contempt for Gingrich's opportunism. That leaves Santorum to gather up the votes of conservative Catholics and evangelicals. They find Gingrich immoral, and they see Romney as unacceptable, for he is a Mormon who has supported abortion in the past.

In the previous post I predicted that South Carolina would be a bloodbath of negative advertising, and it has been. Possibly in the coming Florida primary the Republican leadership will be able to convince the candidates to tone down their rhetoric, in the interest of eventual unity. However, my guess is that the vituperation and nastiness will continue. Romney has begun to attack Gingrich for his ethics violations that cost him leadership in the House of Representatives back in the 1990s. Until now little had been said about this. And Gingrich continues to hound Romney about his off-shore wealth, his low tax rate, and his still undisclosed personal finances. John McCain was successfully attacked for having so many houses that he could not recall how many he had and Romney will be in for similar problems.

It is not a sin to be rich in the United States, but it is unwise to run for public office if the wealth is not mitigated by well-publicized philanthropy or pro bono work for good causes. The rich man who is a public benefactor, like Andrew Carnegie or Bill Gates, is the cultural ideal. Angry or cold rich men who do not give something back are not so popular. Men of great wealth have often created foundations to redistribute their wealth, notably the Ford Foundation or the Rockefeller Foundation. These charitable institutions have the added advantage that the contributions to them are massive tax deductions. Ted Turner gave much of his personal fortune to the United Nations, and Warren Buffet has put billions of dollars into the foundation that Bill Gates created with his own billions. Such acts seem rooted in a Protestant idea of stewardship.

It may be that Romney has been beneficent, but if so, the news has not reached this writer or most of the electorate. He seems to be a ruthless capitalist, a Bain Buccaneer, who recently declared that he likes to fire people. Gingrich also seems devoted to feathering his own nest, and last year at times seemed to campaign in order to promote his own books more than to win. He has accepted outrageous "consultation fees" from clients, when it is obvious that in fact he was peddling his considerable political influence.

None of these men seems a worthy steward of the nation's resources, much less a repository for the public trust. Santorum is not worth commenting on, and Ron Paul too extreme to be taken seriously. Republican voters are left with two wealthy, self-serving, nasty candidates, neither of whom are trustworthy, consistent in their views, compassionate in their nature, or visionary in their politics. When the dust finally settles and we have a Republican nominee, one can only hope that by some miracle a new face has suddenly emerged. A nation of 300,000,000 people surely ought to be able to produce at least one decent Republican candidate. In hard times, a wealthy candidate can be appealing. Think of Franklin Roosevelt. Instead, we have two insensitive rich men, one angry, one cold.

Election 2012: Republicans Want but cannot produce a Mr. Generic to Beat Obama

2012-01-13T22:04:00.000+01:00

After the American Century

The Republican candidates are busy beating each other up in South Carolina. A survey of all the polls shows that not one of them currently would beat Obama. The President beats Romney by c. 2%, Paul by c. 6.5%, Gingrich by 8.5%, Santorum by 7.3%, and Perry by more than 11%. The insanity/stupidly quotient is the same today as it was in 2008, by which I mean that almost 40% of the eligible voters appear ready to vote for an attractive idiot. In 2008 it was Palin, today it is Perry.

Curiously, an imaginary "generic Republican" would have a chance of tying or beating Obama. This is because when you ask voters to think of a generic Republican, they conjure up in their minds a figure who magically unites the party, without specifying a program. A Mr. Generic would presumably be a well-spoken man, with a good speaking voice and a ready smile, a clone of Ronald Reagan.

Mr. Generic does not exist, however, and the reality is that the Republican Party is deeply split between Tea Party activists, evangelicals, Wall Street special interests, and Ron Paul minimalists. Not only is there no person to unite around right now, but it is hard to see how anyone could be that person. The Republicans are in an ideological crisis and lack a focused identity.

Perhaps in theory the disparate elements could make alliances and marriages of convenience in order to cobble together a common front. But instead, the candidates are becoming more vicious in their attacks. This became serious with Romney's attack ads against Gingrich in the Iowa contest, and now has gone far beyond what we have seen in previous contests.

Studies of negative advertisements suggest that their greatest effect is not one of persuading voters to change sides, but rather to destroy the motivation to vote at all. The idea is that only the base (i.e. the more extreme elements, whether to the right or left) will turn out on election day. That is the theory, but it seems headed another direction right now. Negative advertising has usually been seen largely in the general election, not the primaries. What happens when it becomes widespread inside one party? Surely the danger is that it will de-motivate them, destroying enthusiasm for the political process itself.

Since the Republicans are numerically the smaller party to start out with, this spectacular display of disunity weakens their chances of standing together, much less persuading the all-important Independents to come over to their side.

President Obama can sit back, say nothing, and enjoy watching this Republican self-destruction. But he should not get too comfortable, as his own job approval rating is only 45%

Election 2012: On to a Bloodbath in South Carolina

2012-01-11T10:54:00.000+01:00

After the American Century

Romney managed to get 39% of the votes in New Hampshire, a little less than expected but a decent showing. Ron Paul increased his percentage to almost 23%, however, and Huntsman showed that all his hard campaigning in the state paid off, with just shy of 17%. That left Gingrich and Santorum in a dead heat for fourth (and fifth) place with a bit over 9% each. The divided opposition favors Romney. Indeed, it would probably we worthwhile for him to pay some of these candidates to stay in the race, to prevent anyone from getting close to challenging him. What New Hampshire also sugggests is that these voters wanted moderates (Romney and Huntsman) who got 56% of the vote, while the more extreme candidates amassed only 44%.

Now that the New Hampshire results are in, we can look forward to glory combat in South Carolina. This is not going to be nearly so friendly to Romney as New Hampshire. Look for some hard-hitting campaign ads that focus on Romney, who will be attacked by all the other candidates, who are chasing him like a pack of hounds, and they getting more vicious the longer the hunt continues. This may be their last chance to bring him down. for if Romney wins all of the first three contests, the battle will really be over.

In particular, watch Newt Gingrich. He has received $5 million from a single donor, a rich Jewish casino owner from Las Vegas. He and Newt agree on Israel and the need to thwart Iran's nuclear ambitions. He is reportedly an extremely wealthy man, so one wonders why he waited so long to make the giant contribution. Gingrich has been almost running on empty (in financial terms) for some time. He has also been running empty of new ideas, which is no problem given his opposition. Newt is preparing some strong attack ads that apparently will position him as the populist defender of the little guy against the ruthless and heartless Romney from Bain Capital. Romney was expecting such an attack, but in the fall, coming from the Democrats.

Instead, however, the attack has surfaced now, particularly in a 28 minute film, "When Mitt Romney Came to Town" which can be seen here:

http://www.webcasts.com/kingofbain/

Governor Perry has also bought lots of airtime, and he has been showing just what a good ole Southern boy he is, skipping the New Hampshire cold to cozy up to like-minded folks in the cradle of the Confederacy. South Carolina is still proud that it led some other states out of the union and into the Civil War. This is the sort of place where they kept flying the Confederate flag on courthouses until quite recently and were angry when pressured to take it down. In short, good Southern credentials are essential here, and Romney will never have them.

Nikki Haley, Governor of South Carolina, is only 39. She has endorsed Romney

Expect Romney to appeal to his core constituency, the bankers, who are think on the ground in Charleston and other cities, and the retirees from the North. who are baking on the beach at Hilton Head. Otherwise, he has the endorsement of Nikki Haley, the attractive young governor (above) who was elected with Tea Party support. At 39 and part Native American, she is breaks the stodgy Republican mould. He will have to leave the rural and small town voters to Santorum, Gingrich, and Perry.

Huntsman is reinvigorated after his strong finish in New Hampshire, but he will be out of his element. Being a Mormon from Utah who speaks Mandarin Chinese is not what South Carolinians are looking for in a politician. In many ways, he is but another version of Romney - rich Mormon, former Governor, non-Southern. Perhaps he should be dubbed "Romney-light." I think he is positioning himself for 2016, should the Republicans lose in 2012.

Ron Paul will presumably keep working the universities and colleges, which pays a double dividend, not only recruting voters but campaign workers as well. He should find South Carolina congenial. They will doubtless respect a doctor from Texas who wants to make the Federal Government weaker. That sounds like a Confederate policy position. However, Paul has had a problem attracting women voters so far, and this may be decisive if a close race develops.

Right now, however, Romney has the organization, and he certainly has the money, needed to roll over his opponents. South Carolina is his crucial test of electability in the South. If he fails that test, then Republicans will rightly fear that he cannot beat President Obama, and the other candidates will have the chance to discredit him further in the Florida primary.

Election 2012: The Divided New Hampshire Republicans

2012-01-08T20:58:00.000+01:00

After the American Century

All the polls say that Romney will win the New Hampshire primary, and some are silly enough to deduce that this is simply because he is local. But it is not so simple. Romney has 41% in an average of the polls taken (as of yesterday, Jan. 7), which sounds pretty good. But where are the other 60% of the voters?

I know New Hampshire chiefly through my father, who was born there and grew up on a farm there. He worked his way through the University of New Hampshire. Like his father, he remained a Republican all his life, the kind of Republican who is hard to find these days, though they still can be found in The Granite State. Romney appeals to such people. They are not much like the Bible Belt Republicans. They believe in small government, self-reliance, and hard work. They are not much for welfare, though generous to what they would call the truly disadvantaged., such as the blind, or to war veterans who lost a limb. They typically come from rural areas and smaller towns, often, like my Dad, from families that have been in North America since the seventeenth century. Compared to the rest of the Republican Party, these New Hampshire Republicans value education more. They do not talk like Gov Perry but like Gov Romney. They are less emotional, more rational.Some of them will be drawn to Ron Paul (currently about 20% in the polls) and others to Gov Huntsman (currently has c. 10% in the polls).

New Hampshire's Republican Party is more complex than that, of course. The State has a much lower tax rate than next door Massachusetts, and many people choose to live just over the line. They work in Massachusetts but live in New Hampshire. These are not factory workers, but upper middle-class people who have excellent jobs, often along Interstate 495 or on the old Route 128. They represent high-tech companies, and are technically savvy people, the sort who can easily identify with the Harvard educated Mitt Romney who played a leading role at Bain Capital. Romney is especially strong with these voters, but some of them will likely go to Gingrich as well.

We can visualize these two constituencies by looking at a map and some charts, which come from The Wall Street Journal. The farmers and small town Republicans are further to the North. The majority of the state population, however, lives in Manchester and Nashua counties, along the southern edge of the state. As one can see below, Romney's appeal in Iowa was weaker in 2012 than in 2008 everywhere except for the wealthy "burbs" - and fortunately for him, New Hampshire has many such voters in this southern tier.

These are the two key constituencies for Romney, but they are not the whole story. There are other kinds of Republicans in New Hampshire who are more like the Southern version of the party. 23% of the voters are Evangelical Christians who are suddenly flocking to hear Rick Santorum. There is also an energetic local Tea Party, that energized the Republicans to a stunning sweep in the last legislative elections. In addition, there are many conservative Catholics who will not support Romney because they focus on abortion, gay marriage, and other such issues. The Catholics are either of more recent immigrant background or they are French Canadians, who flocked into the state from Quebec after 1850 to work in the mills. These groups overlap, of course, as either an Evangelical or a Catholic might be a Tea Party activist. The big question going into this primary is whether Santorum can galvanize this constituency, and rise well above his current c. 10% in the polls. In theory, he could easily get double that and challenge Ron Paul for second place.

New Hampshire has no really large cities, but of course there are also urban-based Republicans, typically the small businessmen and lawyers. They are worried mostly about economic issues, and they also will likely support Romney, though some will go for Gingrich.

But the New Hampshire primary also has another factor that is hard to figure. Independent voters, i.e. those who are not registered with either of the parties, can and often do vote in the primary. This means that a large number of moderates will be casting their votes in New Hampshire, and this too tends to favor Romney and work against most of his opponents, with the exception of Huntsman, who is also a moderate. In 2008 such voters seemed to have swung to Hillary Clinton in the last two days before the primary, which many mistakenly thought Obama would win. This time around the Independents might once again change the result. But will the Independents go for Romney, Gingrich, Paul, Santorum, or perhaps Huntsman? It is hard to tell, and thus all the more interesting to watch.

I worked in the New Hampshire primary for Senator Eugene McCarthy back in 1968. His central issue was opposition to the Vietnam War, and he was running against Lyndon Johnson, a sitting president. McCarthy shocked the nation by winning over 42% of the vote. Technically, he lost, but LBJ withdrew from the election not long afterwards. By the same token, eveyone expects Romney to win big. He risks winning by too small a margin. Anything below 35% will be regarded as a poor showing. Fortunately for him but unfortunately for the Republican Party, the opposition is divided, and none of them has even remotely the stature of Eugene McCarthy.

Election 2012: Who Really Won in Iowa?

2012-01-04T10:32:00.002+01:00

After the American Century

The Iowa Caucus results are in, and Mitt Romney has eked out the narrowest victory in the history of these affairs. Beating Rick Santorum by a whisker, Romney had almost precisely the same vote total as he did in 2008. In other words, after spending millions of dollars and much time in Iowa, Romney was unable to improve on his second place finish of 2008, when he lost decisively to Mike Huckabee.

Among Republicans, the real winner would seem to be Santorum, who until just a few weeks ago appeared to be an "also ran." In national polls Santorum typically gets only 4%, but in Iowa he got 25%. Evangelicals rallied around him, even though he is a Catholic. Romney, in contrast, performed in Iowa precisely as he does in the national polls, getting 25% of the votes. He technically won, but no one could say that he achieved momentum. Fully three quarters of the Republicans wanted someone else.

One of these others was Ron Paul, who came in a strong third, with 21% of the vote. This was almost double his national polling numbers, and it suggests that he will continue to be a force in the primaries, particularly as they move toward his native South. Paul attracts libertarians and small government enthusiasts, and represents the political (but not the religious) Right.

If it is hard to see which Republican really won anything in Iowa, it is easier to see who lost. Michelle Bachmann did poorly, garnering only 5%. Considering that she was born in Iowa and lives in neighboring Minnesota, if there was one place she might (once) have expected to win, Iowa was it. She never planned to run against Romney in his almost-home state of New Hampshire, and she has now withdrawn from the race.

Newt Gingrich was also a loser, as he fell to only 13% of the vote. In the middle of December Gingrich was the leading Republican candidate, with 35% in the national polls. In Iowa he got little more than a third as much support. He expects to do better in South Carolina. Perhaps he finds solace in the fact that McCain did poorly in Iowa in 2008 but still won the nomination.

Then there is Texas Governor, Rick Perry, whose beautiful hair thatches over a weak mind. He got only 10% of the vote. Back in September, when voters knew little about thim, he was briefly the leading candidate, with over 30% in the national polls. But he has embarassed himself so often that surely it is time for Perry to go home and manicure his hair. However, he has decided to hang in the race at least through South Carolina.

Who then was the winner? Not the Republican Party, which is becoming a deeply split organization. The battle between its three disparate parts – evangelical, corporate, and libertarian – will now become even more intense and divisive. Not Mitt Romney. After four years of running for President, he did no better in Iowa than in 2008, and he has failed to generate any enthusiasm.

The winner, though not on the ballot, was President Obama.

Election 2012. Obama vs. Romney?

2012-01-02T20:49:00.001+01:00

After the American Century

While it is too soon be be certain, it looks like the 2012 election will be a contest between Romney and Obama. It might be that yet another Republican challenger will arise tomorrow, but time is running out for that scenario. Gingrich's star continues to fall. Ron Paul's is rising, but he is too far Right for most voters. Romney is what the GOP seems to have left, though it will likely take at least a month, more likely two months, to establish this for certain. So, what are the differences between these men?

Both Obama and Romney attended Harvard Law School and there are some similarities. But on the whole it stacks up as a clear choice between quite different kinds of men.

Similarities
Both men have long been married to the same women. (Note, however, that on Romney's father's side there were six polygamous men, with a total of 41 wives.) Both graduated near the top of their respective class at Harvard Law School. Both are more centrist than their parties, and both, therefore will have some problems igniting the energies of the more extreme elements of their "base". Both achieved considerable wealth early in life, more in the case of Romney. Both see themselves as outsiders in Washington.

Careers

Romney's father, George, was first an automobile executive in Michigan and a Republican governor in that state. He later ran unsuccessfully in Republican presidential primaries. Mitt has followed the same pattern, starting in business at Bain Capital, then moving to the statehouse, in his case as governor of Massachusetts. Like Obama he ran as an outsider in the 2008 primaries. He made himself better known, but early had to admit that he was not going to get the nomination. He threw his support to McCain. Romney has essentially remained a candidate for president throughout the first Obama term.

Obama did not have a father at home to imitate or to assist him. He achieved his way into one of the best universities and Harvard Law School, where he became editor of the law review. He could easily have gone into corprorate law and made a great deal of money. Instead, he worked as a community organizer in Chicago, taught law, and went tinto Illinois State politics. He also proved to be an excellent writer, with two best-selling books, which helped to propel him into the Senate and the White House.

Economic Theory

Romney, as his business background would suggest, wants to minimize regulation from the government and thinks private enterprise can solve most problems. He is Chicago School and wants to balance the budget. Romney also has a degree from Harvard Business School, and made a fortune working in the private sector. Obama, who taught Constitutional Law at the University of Chicago, is more a Keynsian, and not nearly so wealthy.

Abortion: Multiple Choice vs. Pro Choice

Romney was pro choice when running for governor in Massachusetts, but moved decisively to the right in recent years. Hehas mockingly been called the "multiple choice" candidate, because his views shift on issues. Obama has been consistently pro-choice.

Medical Care

Romney pushed a comprehensive law through the Massachusetts State House that created a health care system quite similar to that Obama and the Democrats created a few years later. However, Romney has consistently attacked the Obama program, again moving well to the right on this issue.

Religion

Romney's Mormanism is definitely a liability, it being more crucial to be mainstream Protestant for a Republican than for a Democratic candidate.

Foreign Policy

Romney sounds more agressive and hawkish than Obama, who has, however, continued many of Bush's foreign policies, not least in the Middle East. The differences are there, but the American public is focused on domestic issues, particularly the economy. The election will only be about foreign policy if there is a major crisis.

Charisma

Obamavery much had it in 2008, but he is no longer the unquestioned darling of the Left, which has found him too much a centrist on many issues. But Obama remains a formidable speaker, with rhetorical gifts that Romney cannot match. Romney has never been accused of having charisma, quite the opposite. He fails not only to ignite the passions of the right-wing Republican base but also to excite moderates listening to his speeches. In one-on-one situations Romney can be stiff and uncompromising. He seems to lack empathy for people who are not like himself. Obama does better with small groups, in most cases.

Campaign Spending
Both men will spend lavishly on this election, which will almost certainly become an orgy of advertising, much of it funded by outside groups and corporations who are "independent" of the candidate they support. However, because so much money will be used, there may be a backlash against it, especially with unemployment over 8.5%.

Overall
If voters cannot decide between two candidates, they often ask themselves, "Which of these two would I rather have a couple of beers with?" This will not be Romney's strong suit, and I think Obama gets an edge on that one. Otherwise, the race may well be decided by who has the more effective running-mate and by unexpected events. The polls right now suggest Obama would win by a small margin against Romney, and my sense is that this ex-governor Mormon businessman will not become more likable as voters see more of him. So much will happen between now and November, that it is too soon to predict a result, but if held today Obama would win the election, but narrowly.

The Year People Doubted their Leaders: 2011 in Review

2011-12-30T17:40:00.000+01:00

After the American Century

2011 was the year when people all over the world declared they doubted the legitimacy or the capacities of their leaders. This common theme emerged almost everywhere.

In Japan, after the Tsunami and accompanying nuclear plant disaster, the public rightly distrusted their government and its regulation of the utilities.

In Tunisia, in Egypt, and in Libya, the "Arab Spring" erupted, as dictators were thrown out of power.

In Syria, protests began and still continue calling for the end of a corrupt and nasty regime.

In the late summer and fall, Britain and the United States, protesters occupied public spaces protesting the banking system's irresponsible behavior, enormous unearned bonuses, and subsequent special treatment from their governments.

In the Russian winter, thousands of people took to the streets to protest a corrupt regime and a rigged election.

In Europe the EURO wobbled through to 2012, but the angry crowds in Greece, Italy and other parts of Southern Europe were also expressing their anger at incompetent leadership.

The cultures and political systems involved are quite different, and the problems are unique, but common to all of these events is an extensive use of smart phones, blogging, Youtube, and other aspects of the new media environment. We apparently are seeing a new disposition of information and communication, with accompanying disruptions of ill-founded legitimacy.

At least one theory has been developed to explain these things, Howard Reingold's Smart Mobs (Basic Books, 2002), which has also spawned a webpage. Reingold focuses on what it can mean for millions of people to have access to smart phones. There are also people out there writing about "self organizing groups.) Whatever label we put on it, it seems the power of any centralized state to control the media is breaking down.

I say "seems" because it is too soon to know the ultimate result. I am sympathetic to the idea that access to the new media increases the flow of information and thereby enhances democracy. But the new media also enhances the flow of dis-information, prejudice, anger, and half-truth. Amplifying people's voices may just create more confusion. (For discussion of this problem, see chapter eight on my Technology Matters,)

But these doubts should not distract us too much. For in 2011, it seems, the "smart mobs" were correct to overthrow Arab dictators, protest sweet deals for bankers who created the financial crisis, demand new elections in Russia, and shame the incompetent in Japan who had built a poorly protected nuclear plant in an exposed location.

The question becomes, what will follow these eruptions of popular protest in 2012? Will the Japanese create a more energy efficient, post-nuclear power system? Will Arab nations create a public sphere where different points of view are tolerated and democracy can flourish, or will they create ideologically conservative, closed societies? Will the occupation movement open up American democracy and help break the gridlock between Republicans and Democrats, or will it further polarize the United States? Will Syrians prove strong enough to overthrow their dictator? Will the Russian protesters be able to make their government more democratic or will its autocracy increase as a response? Will Europeans use the new media to help solve or to worsen the ongoing crisis of the Euro? The opportunities are many but the dangers are rife.

Denmark Expells Educated, Danish-Speaking Immigrant, 28 Years Old

2011-12-20T08:32:00.000+01:00

After the American Century

Denmark had an election recently, and one of the issues was the poor treatment of immigrants. But nothing seems to have changed. They are still treated badly, regardless of their education, ability to speak Danish, or integration into society. And the authorities continue to take many months longer to decide cases than they are supposed to, according to their own rules.

The latest case concerns the son of the former Albanian ambassador to Denmark. He came when 18 years old, studied in gymnasium, learned Danish, graduated, was admitted to Copenhagen University, and has all but completed his MA in Economics. He has been in Denmark for ten years. As these facts would suggest, his Danish is reportedly excellent, He has also been working part time, gaining experience he will need after completing his MA thesis, to be turned in shortly. For those readers who can follow this story in Danish, see the story in Politiken.

This young man would seem to be a model of integration based on hard work and education. He has received his university training free from the Danish state. Now, just as he is ready to work and contribute to society, he has been told to leave the country. The government authorities took 10 months to handle his case, instead of the three months that they are supposed to abide by. This case is obviously is enormously complex! Should a talented, multilingual immigrant who speaks Danish be allowed to stay or should the investment made in his education be thrown away, by expelling him?

Such cases are warning to all who think of coming to work or study in Denmark. The new government has not yet been any better than the xenophobic government it replaced. Even those who learn the language and obviously have skills can be expelled based on complex rules that the bureaucracy seems unable to interpret in a timely fashion. And so, a young man has been told to leave with less than 30 days notice. Instead of writing the last pages of his MA thesis, due in 22 days, he has been sent packing. By tomorrow, the shortest day of the year, he must be out of the country.

I suppose the only "good" thing one can say is that the poor treatment of immigrants is absolutely even-handed, with the same slow decision-making and expulsions for all, regardless of class or social standing. In this case, being the son of an ambassador and working part-time at the Albanian Embassy was no help to him.

The new government continues to disgrace itself. The rhetoric is that the country wants to attract highly qualified immigrants. The reality is that the slow-moving bureaucracy remains as xenophobic as ever. What is Denmark doing to itself?

Knowing of such cases, what am I to say to the foreign students currently enrolled in the MA program I helped to establish in 2002? What about the prospects for foreign students who may enroll in the new BA program that begins in the fall of 2012? What am I to say to those who write asking for information, with plans to apply for next year? Will they be given a chance to stay, when they complete their degrees, or will they be summarily expelled?

Santa's Calling

2011-12-14T15:05:00.002+01:00

After the American Century

Santa's Calling

It's the week before Christmas but Santa's depressed.

His sack is still empty, he's terribly stressed.

And with global warming now melting the Poles

His house and his workshop now float in a shoal.

Poor Mrs. Claus has light deprivation

And winters in Spain, a six month vacation.

His disgruntled workers are no longer "Elves",

"Vertically Challenged" they now style themselves.

His second-hand pipe smoke has them quite frightened.

And his fur-trimmed red suit is at best "Unenlightened."

Four reindeer have gone, without much propriety,

Released to the wilds by the Humane Society.

And affirmative action had made it quite clear

That Santa could no longer have just reindeer.

So instead of Donner and Dancer, Comet and Cupid,

He has three pigs and a moose, and that sure looks stupid!

And the steel runners were removed from his sleigh

Because they cut up the tundra. It was a bad day.

On Christmas Eve some parents call up the cops

When Santa clatters across their solar roof-tops.

Worse yet, he'd lost famous Rudolf, who suddenly chose

To sell Hollywood all the rights to his nose.

That reindeer told Oprah and the entire nation,

He wanted millions in over-due compensation.

And as for gifts, why, he'd not had a notion

That giving presents could cause such a commotion.

Nothing of leather, and nothing of fur,

Nothing gendered for him, nor sexy for her.

No arrows to aim, and no guns to shoot.

No motors, no sprays, for they do pollute.

No pink for the girls, or blue for the boys.

No dangerous fireworks that make lots of noise.

No candy, no sweets...they are bad for the tooth.

No campaign books, for they embellish the truth.

And fairy tales, while not yet forbidden,

Are, like Barbie and Ken, better off hidden.

No baseball, no football (the kids might get hurt);

Besides, such sports exposed them to dirt.

Dolls are so sexist, and now are passe;

And online games rot a young brain away.

So Santa just stood there, fed up and perplexed;

He no longer knew what he could do next.

His sack, quite empty, hung limp to the ground;

It seemed no acceptable gifts could be found.

Something special was needed, a gift that one might

Give to all on the Left, or to all on the Right.

A gift for the Red States, a gift for the Blue,

A gift for the entire political zoo.

A gift that none would feel was taboo

For Christian, Jew, Moslem, Buddhist, Hindu

Every ethnicity, all possible hues,

Everyone, everywhere, and that means you, too.

What is that gift? A smart phone of great worth,

Distracting us all, it brings peace to the earth.

Who has time for discord, once that screen's lit?

Why go into the street, if you can just sit?

Santa saw in a flash that his freedom had come.

He shouted, he danced, he forgot he'd been glum.

Never again would he race the world round,

Nor respond to kids' letters from each little town,

No more presents to haul, nor chimneys to down.

No more stockings to stuff, no more cookies to eat,

No red suit to wear or black boots on his feet,

No freezing up North, nor working all year,

He'd no longer feed those ungrateful reindeer.

Santa turned on his Ipad. He'd sell that old sleigh,

And Fed-Ex us phones, to come Christmas Day.

Can the EURO be Saved by Top Down Budget Controls that Start Next October? And Is Brussels Really Up to this Job?

2011-12-10T16:08:00.001+01:00

The New EU Agreement May Not Work in Practice

After the American Century

I confess that the Euro Crisis seems to me only temporarily "solved." Except for Britain, all the other countries seem ready to let the EU have a veto over their budgets. Is this idea feasible or practical? I think it will prove unworkable, at the latest by November, 2013. I very much hope events prove me wrong, but I fear this was an ill-advised treaty based on panic diplomacy.

Assume this new agreement goes into force and try to imagine how it will work. Each autumn all 17 nations using the Euro (and some 8 or 9 nations who might someday use it) will send their national budget to Brussels and then sit back and wait for weeks or more likely months to hear whether their budget is acceptable.

Brussels will need to have deep knowledge of each nation's domestic politics and economy, so deep that each budget can be evaluated fairly, and quickly. If a single committee of experts examines each of the 25 national budgets and gives just one day to each, it will require five weeks to review them all. That is too superficial a look and yet would take to long, so there would need to be teams of Eurocrats devoted to different clusters of nations. And what chance is there that different committees will all apply the rules in the same ways?

These 25 or 26 national budgets will be complex documents built upon political compromises and assumptions about how each national economy will do in the following year. This year it took the Danes well over a month to come up with their budget, which began with horse-trading behind closed doors between members of the newly elected coalition. What if the technocrats in Brussels declare such a budget invalid? Who then decides where the cuts should be made? How long will decision making take? How will coalitions respond if Brussels imposes cuts that hurt one party in the coalition far more than others? Might not Brussels cause governing coalitions to collapse, forcing new elections, and leaving nations without budgets in the meantime?

Which economic theory will be used to provide the standard model? And what system of national accounting will be used? All nations will need to use the same or very similar systems, one would think, otherwise it will be hard to apply the same rules in an evenhanded manner. Most nations will have to "translate" their customary budget into an EU-friendly form.

What will be the allowable margin of error - i.e. the allowable difference between annual projection and actual performance in the previous year? Will a nation that suffered a natural disaster, such as a flood or earthquake be fined for failing to meet expected performance targets? What if the cuts favor banks rather than homeowners, or they hurt schools rather than hospitals? Workers rather than pensioners? Suppose an EU budget decision is controversial? Can it be appealed? Meanwhile, is a nation making an appeal unable to tax and spend until a decision is final? These are only some of the questions that come to mind. I cannot imagine such a scheme working in the real world.

If we assume that the new arrangement is approved this spring, expect a bureaucratic circus in October and November, 2012.

I think the new treaty is a bad idea because
(1) it is a top-down control mechanism that will be unworkable.

(2) It is based on the idea of cutbacks everywhere as the solution, and does nothing to create jobs or foster growth, except growth in the Brussels bureaucracy.

(3) It does not focus on the international banks as a major part of the currency problem. The banks irresponsibly loaned billions of Euros to nations that could not repay their debts, and the new idea is to let the European Central Bank make those loans instead. I would rather see much tighter controls on the banks themselves, learning from the effective regulation of the Canadian banks who rode out the 2008 crisis quite well.

The Scandinavian countries, none of whom now have the Euro. should put a few people to work on Plan B: a common currency for Norway, Sweden, and Denmark. This would quickly be recognized as solid and secure. Compared to working with Brussels, it would be easy to administer. This particular Plan B has been discussed before and rejected. Would any Danish political party have the courage to explore this idea? Probably not now.

Wait until about 2013, when people see the complexities, inequities, and delays that come with a centralized Euro and top-down control of national budgets. By then, Britain may look like the smart one who opted out early.

My Mark Twain (A tenuous, triple relationship)

2011-12-09T14:02:00.001+01:00

I have alwayssuffered from the pleasant illusion that I have a personal relationship to Mark Twain.This is a family matter. Those whohave read Roughing It will recallthat Mark Twain describes going to Nevada, where his brother is to serve as thesecretary to the Governor. Well, that governor was named Nye. In fact, anentire county is named after him today, Nye County, in Southern Nevada. Go look at any map, and it is there, perhaps the largest county in the state, and some of it highly radioactive. On the map below, it is the largest green spot, the green being a case of false advertising, for this is a sun-baked desert country of little value to most people, unless you like tumble weed.

No doubt it was this part of Nevada that Twain had in mind when he remarked, "Some people are malicious enough to think that if the devil were set at liberty and told to confine himself to Nevada Territory, he would...get homesick and go back to hell again." Nye County has one of the most impressive suicide rates of any county in America. It is almost exactly the same size as Denmark, and I am proud of its sun-baked potential. It will surely one day prove a solar energy bonanza. If any of you want to know moreabout Governor (and later US Senator) James Nye, I have a book in the office thatgives a short biography of him. My uncle, George Nye, the family antiquarianand genealogist until he passed away in 2000, wrote that book.

But this isnot my chief reason for thinking I have a personal relationship to Twain. No,it gets worse. As you probably know, Twain spent much of his time as a platformspeaker, a humorist. Well, one of the other platform speakers of the day was Edgar Wilson "Bill"Nye. He, like Twain, was a Midwesterner who had gone out West. Bill Nye was theeditor of a newspaper in Laramie, Wyoming for a while in the 1880s, with the wonderful name The Boomerang, and whilewriting for that paper he became a funny man. In 1894, long after escaping from Wyoming, he wrote a comic history of the United States that sold almost as well as some of Twain's books. Both ofthese men began as newspaper reporters, started stretching the truth to filltheir pages, and ended up telling tall tales and making fun of the world, as away of making a living. This has always appealed to me and explains why I became ahistorian. Twain once said of Bill Nye, "Edgar W. Nye's humor I enjoy for it is the frosting on the cake. There is something shining out through it all."

Bill Nye and Mark Twain werefriendly, and they even appeared on the stage together a few times. Thedifference between them, however, is, that Mark Twain is still funny today,while much of Bill Nye's humor seems a bit faded. Some of his remarks are still fresh, however, such as: "I have been told that Wagner's music is much better than it sounds." Bill Nye was in tune with histimes, and he made Victorians laugh, but Twain was more in tune with the ages. He not only made his contemporaries laugh but all those who cameafter him as well.

Still, I liketo think that with these blood relatives who knew Twain, one at the start ofhis career and another one later on, I have some deeper connection to him than most people.I also have visited his house, which is now a museum, in Hartford Connecticut,not far from where my parents once lived. I could give the tour guide's talk myself, if Ihad to. So, if after a few drinks I begin to make mystical claims about Twain,you will have to consider the fact that my family and his have been connectedfor about 150 years. Of course, Twain died decades before I was born, but I havespoken to people whose lives overlapped with his. My great aunt, GraceNye, lived to be 101. She was born in 1892, so it may well be true, as shesaid, that she once saw Twain when she was a little girl.

None of thisreally means a great deal. In the world of criticism it counts for nothing atall. But I want to claim a genuine and ineffable superiority to anyone who does not have a giant desert wasteland county named after theirfamily in Nevada, a now forgotten ancestor who was a platform humorist who knew the great Mark, and a deceased aunt who (she said) once met him.

Election 2012: Prognosticating the Republican Race

2011-12-08T20:59:00.001+01:00

After the American Century

The field of Republican candidates has narrowed down to two front runners and a couple of dark horses, and it is time to look ahead to the Iowa Caucuses and New Hampshire primary. What is likely to happen? Right now, it appears that Newt will run well Iowa, while Mitt should predominate in New Hampshire, which is next door to his native Massachusetts. However, he is not close to getting half the votes, with current polls giving him 35-38%, with Gingrich showing a respectable 23-25%. Ron Paul is running third, with c. 17%, as well as an improved showing for Huntsman at 8% after considerable money spent on television advertising in his behalf in recent weeks. Even with the mysteriously popular Cain now gone, there is no absolute winner.

New Hampshire is not a winner-take-all event, and the delegates to the National Convention will be roughly proportional to the votes candidates receive. I would not expect Paul to drop out early, but to continue on in hopes of gradually gaining ground while the two front-runners slug it out. Huntsman seems to have little chance with the Republican voters, even though he is a good candidate, but he will likely remain a while longer. Remember that even if a candidate is unsuccessful, he or she does acquire some delegates. In a close race between Gingrich and Romney, which seems quite possible, the delegates controlled by a Ron Paul (or even by Michelle Bachmann who currently has about 3-4% of New Hampshire voters supporting her) might prove important. Let us assume then that the closer the race between the front-runners, the greater the incentive for others to remain in the race to gain bargaining chips to be cashed in at the Convention.

The more immediate event is the always unpredictable Iowa caucuses, which are based more on passion and grassroots participation than on overall numerical support. It is a contest between whoever happens to show up at the various meetings across the state. If the Iowa contest were held tomorrow, polls tell us the results would look something like this: Gingrich one third, Romney one fifth, Paul a bit less than one fifth, and Perry, Bachmann, Santorem, and Huntsmann dividing the remainder. Note, however, that these figures have not been very stable. Bachmann was leading the field in the late summer; Gingrich was getting only 5% as recently as early October; and Cain was the leader in Iowa for much of November. There is so much turbulence that it is hard to predict the Iowa result.

Another thing to remember is that some candidates who are weak in the polls may be running more to establish themselves with the public in order to run again in four years time, and some of these lesser candidates may also harbor hopes of becoming the Vice-Presidential candidate. Joe Biden was in this position four years ago. For example, Romney might select Ron Paul and thereby make the right-wing base happy. Or he could go for Huntsman and create an all-Mormon ticket! Actually quite impossible for that very reason. But Huntsman might be the sober fellow that Gingrich needs to balance his flamboyance, should he be the candidate.

We should distrust our perception of the presidential race in December, however. Four years ago the media had all but anointed Hillary Clinton as the Democratic candidate, and many thought Giuliani might be the Republican candidate. That said, Romney has the edge in organization and he has more money than Gingrich. In a long battle he should prevail. And yet he is so dull, and he does not excite the right.

Socialists Break Another Promise: Public Transportation

2011-12-02T13:38:00.001+01:00

After the American Century

Socialists and the Socialist People's Party campaigned on the green platform of improving mass transit, reducing fares, and taxing the heavy traffic that floods into Copenhagen every day. Now that they have won, however, the plan is to do nothing of the kind. Instead, they will make no improvements in mass transit, raise the fares, and yet still impose the road pricing on those who drive into town. So taxes will go up, prices will go up, quality will go down, and the roads will remain just as crowded. This is not what one expects from a socialist government. One expects them to be able to deliver social services.

The photograph shows a Copenhagen bus advertisement promising that if they come to power the Socialist People's Party will lower bus and commuter train fares by 40%. Instead, they will rise 3.1%

The Socialists have broken many campaign promises, notably to the universities and the hospitals. They have decided not to return to the tax code in use when the country was prosperous and could afford its social services in the 1990s. Rather, they will keep the lower tax rates developed by the previous conservative coalition. The new government seems to have been captured by the same incompetent planners and economists who advised the conservatives. It appears that there is almost no difference between Right and Left in reality, with the notably exception of how they say they will treat immigrants.

An Electrical Blackout Just For Me?

2011-11-29T18:24:00.001+01:00

After the American Century

The storm that lashed Denmark Saturday night with hurricane winds caused a blackout at our house. We were watching television when suddenly all the lights on the ground floor went out, and the film we were enjoying disappeared. The buglar alarm began to ring, as it does when forced over on to battery power. Not its forceful full screaming mad sound, but an insistent call for assistance. Looking out the window, my wife and I immediately saw that the neighbors were not affected, and we soon found that the floors above and below us still had power. It seemed obvious that the problem could be solved by changing a fuse. We found a flashlight and a fuse, made the change, and. . . nothing happened. By this time we were getting a bit cross, missing the film, and quickly put in another fuse, also without any result.

All this time the burglar alarm continued to ring, intermittently, and we began to wonder if we might be hearing this all night. So we called the security company and asked if they could stop it, and of course also reported that the power outage was the reason. We could hear the wind howling.

It being the middle of a weekend, the last thing we wanted to do was call an electrician, because coming for an emergency on a Saturday would cost us a minimum of $200, based on past experiences when we needed a plumber or a locksmith. So I decided to go outside in the rain and wind to see if by any chance I could spot the problem. It seemed unlikely, but worth a try.

Outside there was lots of wind, but little rain, and I shone the flashlight up on the side of the house where the four electric lines come in. They all seemed very securely attached. But then, from the corner of my eye I saw and in my right ear I heard a buzzing bluish spark. One of those four lines was loose at the other end, where it joined the main line!

We called the power company, assuming that we would have to wait, perhaps even to Monday, but glad we knew the problem. It was not a short-circuit caused by a leak, for example, which would have been hard to find, expensive to fix, and in the meantime a danger. This was far better, as the problem was not our fault, and we would not have to pay anything.

Remarkably, a crew was on the scene in less than two hours from the time we called, and by 11 PM a truck with a lift had taken a man up to the loose wire, sizzling there in the rain, and his nonchalance made him casually heroic in the gusting wind. In less than two minutes he had reattached the electrical line and the power was on again in our house.

What does this event mean? Well, that some things work really well in Denmark. But not everything. One of the most frequent causes of blackouts is a failure to trim trees growing beneath power lines. Did I forget to mention this? The electrical line that failed is slightly entangled in a tree, and our neighbor whose windows are closer to the connection than ours, asked that someone from the city come and cut it back. Nothing was done, however, as the municipality seems to be saving money on such things.

That said, it nevertheless did seem rather amazing that of all the houses on this street, ours should be the one affected, and only one floor, where I happened to be. After all, my last book was about electrical blackouts. Power failures are usually more widely shared, but this one was quite private.

New Danish Government Breaks its Word and Slashes University Teaching Budgets

2011-11-25T22:27:00.001+01:00

After the American Century

Many hoped that the new socialist-led government would offer a dramatic improvement over the previous right-wing coalition. But in many areas where they promised change, they have continued the old policies. Some of the promises they have broken were made with extreme clarity, and then forgotten immediately after they came to power.

One of the most notorious examples was the promise, given in writing as an unshakeable commitment, that the hospital emergency room in Svenborg would not be closed. It serves several islands and the southern part of the larger island where I live, This written and signed promise was given and then broken as soon as they took office. Now they declare it will be closed. I firmly believe that some people will die because it will take them over an hour from the time an ambulance arrives until they can get to the only emergency room that will be left, in Odense, where I live. This is a blow to a beleaguered area that already has trouble attracting residents. Before the election, the Socialists claimed they would help such outlying areas, and not continue the policy of centralization that is killing such areas.

Likewise, the new Socialist-led government promised to roll back a sizable cut to the university budgets proposed by the old government before the election. In Denmark a certain amount is paid to each university for every student it matriculates. The old government proposed to cut this amount by 3000 kroner per student, and the new government now agrees. In 2012 Danish universities will find their teaching budgets reduced by c. 600 million kroner, or more than 100 million dollars. (Those who read Danish, see the news stories here, and here) To put this another way, support in most of the humanities will fall by 6.5% per student, but given rising costs the effect will feel like a 10% reduction. This decision will force universities to cut the number of teaching hours, put students into larger classes, fire some faculty, and slow down the purchase of essential equipment.

These cuts are twice as large as the increases announced for research, amounting to c. 300 million kroner for 2012. These funds are not all funneled to the universities, however. For example, some research money will go to Hospitals or innovation support institutions. In any case, the research funds that do go to universities cannot be used for teaching. The plans for 2013 call for even larger reductions for teaching, which will create a severe crisis.

Before the election the Socialists said (or rather they pretended to believe) that increased funding for education was essential, because the only real asset Denmark has is its people. A highly educated and skilled population will be needed to compete in the global market, but this new government, like the old one, now is unwilling to pay for it. SDU's Rektor Dr. Jens Oddershed, speaking for the rektors of all the universities, declared that the government had broken its word.He was being diplomatic. A more scientifically objective view would be that the Socialists are cynical prevaricators.

Readers inside Denmark know that these are just two of many examples of the socialist-led government's unapologetic refusal to honor campaign promises. Like the previous government, the Socialists lack integrity. They prolaim one thing, but do quite another. In a few areas they are better, but in general it seems that, as George Orwell put it in the conclusion to Animal Farm, "The pigs have become men."

Where might the money come from to support hospitals and education? This government has refused to roll back tax cuts given to the wealthy by the previous right-wing government. Anyone can now see that the cuts were based on miscalculations and that they were un-financed.

Why should universities and hospitals be cut instead of rolling back the tax cuts for the wealthy? This is not even remotely a socialist program. It is not even an intelligent capitalist program. The new government so far has been a severe disappointment.

What we can be thankful for on Thanksgiving

2011-11-24T22:03:00.001+01:00

After the American Century

A cynic might say that we have nothing to be thankful about on Thanksgiving. But there are some good things. I am delighted that Sarah Palin is not Vice President, for example, and glad, too, that McCain is not living in the White House. I am pleased that US energy use (per capita) has leveled off in recent years, and that the shift to renewable energy is continuing, more slowly than I would like, but it is happening.

It is a good thing that the Cold War came to an end, and that the economies of Eastern Europe continue to improve - a story that has been rather swept aside with all the focus on Greece's deficit. Likewise, little Iceland has clawed its way back from the brink of collapse. Denmark has gotten rid of a very bad government and replaced it with one slightly better. The Germans remain willing to bail out the failed economies of Southern Europe, and the French show signs of dumping their prime minister, whom I never have liked much. Italy has finally gotten rid of that buffoon Berlusconi. As for Spain, the economy is rotten and the socialists have been cast out by the voters, but at leas the football is sublime.

Many bemoan the low house prices in much of the western world, but this is a good thing for millions of first-time home buyers, who also get lower interest rates than in a booming economy. My own house is worth a bit less, but I am not planning on moving any time soon. The loss for me and the majority of people is more theoretical than real, and those starting out a life can get a good deal, often after years of waiting.

I am also glad that the US did not make the turkey the national bird, as Ben Franklin suggested. For in that case it might have become a protected species, and instead we might be eating genetically enhanced butterball bald eagles.

Gingrich Emerges to Challenge Romney

2011-11-18T07:18:00.001+01:00

After the American Century

The American presidential primary season is almost upon us. Unlike 2008, only one of the parties has to find a candidate, so all the attention will be on the many Republicans seeking the chance to run against Obama. They are a rather disappointing lot, rather like a dinner consisting of warmed over remnants of better meals. I am already tired of them, one and all, from the underwhelming Romney to the inept Cain and Perry. Governor Perry, who cannot remember his own program, makes George Bush look eloquent. Cain, who apparently has not been reading the newspapers since 1964, did not know that China already has nuclear weapons and was completely out of his depth when asked rather easy questions about Libya.

And Newt Gingrich? Spare me more drivel from the half-baked "historian" from Georgia. He was a disaster as Speaker of the House and left that chamber in disgrace. Apparently, he was still in disgrace with voters, as for weeks he polled far worse that Cain, even after all the innuendo and accusations about sexual misconduct. Think about this: for weeks a Black man accused of sexually harassing white women has been polling better than Gingrich.

But Newt did not give up, and in recent weeks he has begun to rise in the polls as Perry has fallen. Gingrich is the latest to try out for the role as the "man who is not Romney." If one averages five recent polls, the two men are almost tied, with both getting around 22%. The latest Pew poll puts Gingrich a bit further down the list, but clearly rising, while Cain can only fall and Perry has already fallen. The most credible candidate the Republicans have, to my way of thinking is, Huntsman, but he barely seems alive in the race.

Romney 23%

Cain 22%

Gingrich 16%

Perry 8%

Paul 8%

Bachmann 5%

Santorum 2%

Huntsman 1%

Romney's self depiction on his web site

With no candidate able to rally even one quarter of the Republican voters, this race still seems unsetteled even if some pundits think Romney is the likely winner. I see real problems with his candidacy:

(1) Romney was more liberal in Massachusetts in his actions than he has been in his current campaign promises. There is a major credibility problem here. Who is the "real Romney"? The man who put in a health care program in Massachusetts much like that Obama brought in nationally, or the Romney of today who attacks that health care program? He is constantly depicted, by Republicans and Democrats alike, as a flip-flopper.

(2) Romney is a Mormon, and this makes conservative republicans uneasy, or downright hostile. Many voters know little about Mormonism, but it is a religion that can rather easily be attacked or caricatured. They have an obsession with genealogy and want to baptize the dead into their faith, after all, and the Book of Mormon does not bear up well under close scrutiny. Mark Twain called it "chloroform in print,"and concluded, "The Mormon Bible is rather stupid and tiresome to read." Perhaps too much reading of this text has made Romney rather tiresome, For . . .

(3) Romney has all the charisma of an accountant.

If not Romney, then who? Right now Gingrich is the man to watch.

Benjamin Franklin's London Home

2011-11-12T12:37:00.001+01:00

After the American Century

Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790) was one of the most famous Americans in his own time, and he has remained an iconic figure ever since. He is on the $100 bill, his Autobiography is still in print, and some of the institutions he helped create, notably the University of Pennsylvania, are flourishing. He was interested in everything, and his curiosity led him to discover that lighting was a form of electricity. He invented a practical and efficient stove. He discovered the existence of the Gulf Stream. In his 80s, when his eyes were weak, he invented bifocals. Franklin was also a consummate politician and a key figure in creating the American Revolution. Yet one looks in vain for a Franklin house or homestead in the United States. The houses where he lived have not survived as museums.

The reasons for this are not hard to find. Franklin lived abroad most of the period from 1757 until 1785, almost entirely in London and Paris. In both capitals he represented the Americans. First, in London, he served as the representative of several colonies in their affairs with the British government. He functioned as a proto-ambassador. Afterwards, he was the first American ambassador to France (1776-1785).

Franklin was in London between 1757 and 1775, when he lived at 36 Craven Street, close to Charring Cross Station (built much later, of course). This house opened as a museum in 2005, and it is well worth a visit. Fortunately, the house is easily accessible, being just minutes away from Trafalgar Square. No doubt Franklin chose to live there because it was near government offices. It was also a convenient place for his many scientific friends to drop in.

The Georgian house was relatively new when Franklin rented its best rooms and hired a family to keep house for him. It survived fire, flood, and World War II's bombings, which destroyed several other houses nearby. The place was nearly falling down when saved for posterity. The restored rooms are largely bare of furniture, but their woodwork and arrangement are preserved.

Visitors are taken on a tour into the past by an costumed actress/guide who holds a dialogue with disembodied voices that have been pre-recorded. The visit to each room becomes a dramatic vignette, that seizes the imagination more than one expects. This sort of thing can be done badly, but it worked well for me, and seemed historically accurate. For those whom I took the tour with, this technique worked extremely well. It was almost like attending an innovative theatrical production.

The next time you are in London, visit the house and get a glimpse of Franklin and of how he lived in c. 1770. If you are interested in doing research on Franklin, note that the top floor of the house has been made into the Robert H. Smith Scholarship Centre, with an array of source materials, plus links to Yale University and other centers that study Franklin.

Finally, in case you have not already read it, Franklin's Autobiography is an excellent book, available in many editions, and also in digital format.

Cleveland's Marvelous Public Library

2011-11-06T22:13:00.005+01:00

After the American Century

I had the pleasure of spending a day in the Cleveland Public Library last week. The librarians were knowledgeable, courteous, and efficient. The two buildings were handsome places to work, but the real test of a public library or an archive for a historian is what one finds. Sometimes an entire day yields almost nothing, perhaps due to poor luck, but often due to poorly organized materials, finding aids that are inadequate, or staff who make only a minimal effort. Sometimes, I get what I hoped to find, and go away satisfied, which was my experience on a similar mission at the Boston Public Library a year ago. But once in a great while I find much more than I had dared expect, and if this happens it almost always is because the librarians and archivists are real professionals.

Cleveland Public Library, the new building holds the photographic collections

In this particularly happy research expedition, I spent almost all my time in the photographic collection, housed in the newer of the two library buildings and located on the fourth floor. All the images that I requested seemed to be near at hand, not buried in a vault or stored off-site. Moreover, the staff, led by the extremely capable Margaret Baughman, took a real interest in my project, and suggested places to look that I had no way of knowing about.

In the space of a single day, I reviewed hundreds and hundreds of images, selecting 14 in the end for reproduction. These images were scanned and ready for me as digital files the following day. Moreover, the price was extremely fair, in an age when every archive routinely demands $100 or more for each image. I have paid as much as $500 for a single image from a well-known magazine, whose name you might guess but I will not specify here. Such high prices force historians to make compromises or omit images, unless they are fortunate enough to find an oasis like the Cleveland Public Library.

Below, I reproduce one of the images I found there, but to fit it within this blog it is a mere jpeg file, not the wonderful TIFF scan provided to me. This is too large for easy use on this blog.

This image shows part of the Ford Motor Company's Model T assembly line. This is how it looked in 1913, when the method of manufacturing was just being invented. It was so new it did not yet have a name. Originally, this photograph was used in one of the Cleveland newspapers, now defunct, whose images were donated to the Cleveland Public Library. I will be using it in a book to be published by MIT Press in 2013, a centennial history of the assembly line in American culture.

Many of the best things in life are unexpected. The efficiency, intelligence and helpfulness of this library staff make Cleveland an attractive place to do research, and I very much expect to return for help with other projects.

Halloween in Boston

2011-11-01T02:38:00.001+01:00

After the American Century

In the Halloween streets of Boston costumes. Dracula in the subway, a cowboy in the diner, and a gypsy in the bookstore. Free candy at almost every cash register, and even in a serious office a bit of playful clothing, an odd hat, flashing electric earrings or a wild orange tie.

Whatever may be wrong with the US economy, whatever fears may clutch at the heart (or the wallet), Americans still know how to be playful and a little crazy. There is an edge, and it is not getting dull.

This playfulness should not suggest frivolity, for it is the flip-side of the energy and drive that Americans pass down through the generations. Yes, there are problems, and I write about them here in this space often enough. But there is no lack of enthusiasm and shared good humor nevertheless.

OK, this is just Halloween, but the levity is a sign of good mental health, despite the bitterness about the banks, despite the partisan politics, despite the 9% unemployment, and despite the weight of individual difficulties. Walking around the city today was a reminder that the country is far more than the sum of its problems.

Solving the problem of global warming. Could consumers lead better than nations?

2011-10-27T23:08:00.000+02:00

After the American Century

It seems that governments are not going to solve the problem of global warming as quickly as it needs to be ddealt with. Yet it need not be tackled by legislation. It could also be a consumer-led change.

1. Create a system that ranks countries into four groups (A, B, C. D), depending on to what degree they contribute to global warming. The rankings might be produced by the World Wildlife Fund or Greenpeace, or perhaps a consortium of environmental groups. The rankings would have to rely on information that is already publicly available, at least at first, but if the movement were successful it might have resources to develop its own data banks,

2. Once a year, a month before Christmas, consumers worldwide would hear via Facebook and other social media where each nation ranks, so that they have the chance to choose intelligently and buy products from nations with better ratings. The hope would be that consumers would be more willing to buy from nations that are trying to solve the problem of global warming rather from those that are making matters worse.

3. Once the rating system has been developed for nations, next allow corporations to be rated as well, so that an environmentally responsible company can get a high ranking even if the nation where it is located cannot.

4. The third step would be to give ratings to cities, so that if Seattle or Munich or Oslo or Rio wanted to they could achieve a rating higher than that within their home nation.

5. Concurrent with these developments, encourage nations to give foreign aid for conversion to clean energy technologies focusing on those developing nations where the military budget is less than 2% of GNP. It is absurd to pour money into a nation that is investing in tanks rather than insulation, bombs rather than solar panels, or jet fighters rather than wind mills. If poor nations are not focusing their resources on the problem, why should anyone else?

6. Give annual awards to successful projects that are actually completed (not just proposals) that both improve the quality of life and reduce global warming. Make the awards as glamorous as the Academy Awards. Governments whose nations are in the A category would also be put in the limelight at these events and part of the ceremony would be to welcome any new members of the "A" club and to congratulate those who had moved up a category. Nations in the D category would not be allowed to have a presenter at the awards, but they would be welcome to attend.

7. After these ideas have been implemented, go after the trading system. nstead of considering all trade to be a good thing, no matter what is traded, nations would be encouraged to revise their import taxes and tax codes to favor products whose production and use have the least environmental impact. This sort of taxation would encourage corporations to manufacture in an environmentally responsible way. I do not suggest that such taxes be punitive. Rather, they could be a restructuring of current VAT, and be applied to c. 25 consumer goods that are particularly large consumers of energy, such as automobiles, air conditioning, stoves, televisions, and so forth.

I realize this is only a sketch, but hope such ideas can be expanded and implemented. An umbrella organization would be needed. Ideally, someone with deep pockets might support it, or perhaps the Norwegians, who have a large budget surplus and a history of environmental awareness, could take the role as a lead nation. But as I said at the beginning, the best thing would be a consumer movement that is not a hostage to politics.

100 Danish Poems, From the Medieval Period to the Present Day - Bilingual Edition

2011-10-27T17:45:00.001+02:00

After the American Century

This is the 300th time I have written in this blog, and I was wondering what would be an appropriate subject. Today a book came to hand that serves nicely.

This fine book has been published this week, under the title 100 Danish Poems: From the Medieval Period to the Present Day. These are not just any 100 poems but a careful selection of the best in Danish literature. They presented a complex translation problem, as it simply would not do to have all the poems sound as if they were written in 2011, nor would it be a good idea to write in a modern idiom and then sprinkle in a few old words here and there from the appropriate time periods.

Fortunately, John Irons, the British translator, has more than 25 years experience. He has lived in Scandinavia for more than 40 years, and frequently translates from Norwegian into English as well. He holds a PhD in Modern and Medieval Languages from Cambridge University and is a published poet himself. Irons is sensitive to the language and the rhythms of the poems and to the changes in literature that occurred from the medieval period onwards. In addition, he was able to work closely with both the Danish poet Klaus Høeck and the editors of the volume, Thomas Bredsdorff and Professor Anne-Marie Mai, who selected and edited the poems. She has also written a 43 page introduction that provides the historical and literary context many English readers will require. The poems themselves are presented without headnotes or footnotes that might distract.

Readers who know both Danish and English can decide for themselves whether they like the translations in this beautifully produced, bilingual edition. The original and the translation face each other on every page. Here is a sample, from pages 182-183, the first lines from a poem by Hans Christian Andersen:

Det gamle Træ, o lad det staa

Det gamle Træ, o lad det staa
Indtil det døer af Ælde;
Saamange Ting det husker paa.
Hvad kan det ikke melde.

Irons renders these lines as:

That ancient tree, don't let it fall
Until old age is knelling;
So many things it can recall
What tales it could be telling.

Note that Irons has not only retained the sense of these lines, he has also kept their rhyme and rhythm. He makes it look easy, but it is not.

Here is a second example, the lovely last verse of Jeppe Aakjær's "Maynat" (May Night), 1916 (pp. 200-201).

Saa ensomt bræger det spæde Lam
paa Bakken langt i det fjærne,
og Frøerne kvækker fra Pyt og Dam,
som sang det fra Stjærne til Stjærne.

The lonely young lamb on the hill beyond
can be heard with its plaintive small baa,
and the frogs all croak from puddle and pond,
as if star now were singing to star.

My third and final example, is the opening four lines of a work by Tove Ditlevsen, from 1947 (pp. 250-251).

Blinkende Lygter

I Barndommens lange og dunkle Nat
brænder smaa blinkende Lygter
som Spor, af Erindringen efterladt,
mens Hjertet fryser og flugter.

In childhood's long night, both dim and dark
there are small twinkling lights that burn bright
like traces memory's left there as sparks
while the heart freezes so and takes flight.

The reader may be tempted to try revising this example, but in doing so will find how difficult it is to preserve simultaneously the rhyme, the meaning, and the rhythm. Irons retains the rhyme and the meaning, but to so must sacrifice the original rhythm. I spent some time trying to do better, and found I could not. But the effort helped me to see the Danish original more clearly, which is one of the pleasures of books that present both the original and the translation on facing pages.

The book is available in both Denmark (from Museum Tusculanum Press) and the United States (from the University of Washington Press).

This posting is #300 on After the American Century

Obama Correct to Leave Iraq

2011-10-22T11:21:00.003+02:00

After the American Century

After months of negotiations, the US and Iraq were unable to agree on how many troops might be left behind to help train and support the coalition government. Reportedly, the US suggested a level of 10,000, but the Iraqis wanted only half that, or even less. President Obama then decided, after repeated attempts to get a clear agreement, to pull the plug.

This seems the right decision, and probably the only option. Would a few thousand American troops really make much of a difference to the country's security? Keeping a symbolic force in the country might well have been a continued provocation to the opposition. Much better to give Iraq a clear message: the US is leaving. Iraq, you are now on your own, as a sovereign nation, to succeed or fail.

Nine years is a long time to intervene in any country, and the United States at some point must have higher priorities than continuing to keep 42,000 troops in Iraq. There were once four times that many, plus troops from the "coalition of the willing."

I was never a supporter of the invasion of Iraq, which was justified by the false claim that it harbored weapons of mass destruction. The country was ruled by a terrible regime, but removal of that regime has cost 700+ billion dollars and an enormous loss of life. The war itself was not difficult to win, but the Bush Administration disgracefully showered huge contracts on its political allies to rebuild the country and treated prisoners disgracefully, angering the entire Arab world against the abuses, displayed in photographs for all to see on the Internet. An on-line poll conducted by MSNBC has found, as of this writing, that 87% of the respondents do not think the Iraq war was worth it. Many commentators share this view, including the Center for American Progress.

This nine years in Iraq offers quite a contrast with Libya, where the cost was far lower, the time required shorter, and American troops never entered the country. This difference strongly suggests the difference between Bush and Obama, Republicans and Democrats.

The arts of peace are more nuanced and difficult than the arts of war. Let us hope that Iraq will do better governing itself than it has under the occupation. But for the US, it is time to spend its scarce resources elsewhere. Think what that $700 billion might have been used for.