Obama Prepares Some German One-Liners
For a few brief shining moments on Thursday, attention will turn to Barack Obama’s only public speech of his week-long foreign tour, when the presumed Democratic nominee speaks at Berlin’s 19th Century Victory Column.
With a recent Gallup poll showing a majority of Europeans favoring the Illinois senator over Sen. John McCain, Germans are expected to flood Berlin’s central Tiergarten at 7 p.m. to hear signs Senator Obama, if elected, will repair relations between the U.S. and Germany, badly damaged over the last eight-years, particularly since the beginning of the Iraq war.
Devin Pendas, Professor of History and Director of Graduate Studies at Boston College, thinks ``part of the German hostility to the war in Iraq stems from the fact that most Germans perceive that conflict to be a purely American affair, in a way that the Cold War was clearly not. ``And because Germany, unlike Spain or England, has not been the victim of a terrorist attack, Professor Pendas explained, they feel even less connection to a global war on terror.’’
And while much has changed in Germany’s capital and largest city in the northeast part of the country since the days of the Cold War, with the crumbling of the Berlin Wall and the disintegration of Communism, Berlin might actually be a perfect setting for the junior senator to tackle some common themes hardly limited to Germany, Europe, or even the United States, which are: economic hardships, how to deal with a growing immigration population, and uniting countries divided by religious and cultural differences.
Michael P. Steinberg, Director of the Cogut Center for the Humanities and Professor of History and Music at Brown University, thinks Obama's speech has the potential of breaking down old walls and building new bridges, particularly in ethnically diverse populations ``It [Berlin] has the largest Turkish population outside of Turkey, i.e. a largely Islamic population that has had substantial success with integration into European culture, social fabric, and politics. ``Obama, Professor Steinberg wrote through an email, represents symbolically the replacement of old oppositions with new hybridities.’’
And though Mr. Obama’s been known to gladden crowds with his compelling message of hope and optimism to people beset by the carnage of war, struggling with a housing and energy crisis, and the helplessness felt by a displaced labor force, the expectations of his speech will inescapably be compared to John F. Kennedy, when the 35th president of the United States spoke 45-years ago to an ecstatic mob assembled at Berlin’s Rudolph Wild Platz. Unquestionably, a tall-order has been placed on Mr. Obama’s plate even for a charismatic and gifted speaker as himself.
After all, what words or phrases can the Democratic nominee possibly use that could top JFK’s memorable: ``Ich bin ein Berliner’’
Steven Ozment, Professor of Ancient and Modern History at Harvard University, and author of ``A Mighty Fortress: A New History of the German People’’, has a few suggestions:
``Heute wieder ein Volk"
``Today once again one people!"
``Die freie Stadt Chicago gruesst die freie Stadt Berlin"
``Free Chicago greets Free Berlin!"
"Ich bin ein Buerger der Welt!" "
``I am a citizen of the world!"
**
While Professor Steinberg, suggests:
"Wir sind alle Berliner."
``We are all Berliners"
**
Since the Iraq war has dragged everyone’s spirits down in one form or another from every corner of the globe, my suggestion would be for Sen. Obama to use a line attributed to Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, the German poet, novelist and playwright, who wrote:
``Uber allen Gipfeln 1st Ruh''
``Over all the mountain tops is peace.’’
Of course, if Mr. Obama really wants to shamelessly pander to the home crowd, he could always invoke George Clemenceau’s last dying words (at least as documented by Norman Davies in ``Europe: a History’’):
``Ich wünsche, aufrecht vergraben zu werden -- stehend Deutschland gegenüber“.
``I wish to be buried upright-facing Germany.''
-Bill Lucey
billlucey@bellsouth.net
Obama's Magical History Tour
One telling sign that Barack Obama’s foreign policy knowledge was his soft spot, came during the Democratic Debate in Cleveland, Ohio, back in February, when moderator Tim Russert (God, rest his soul), tossed both candidates what he would later describe as a ``jump ball’’ on a foreign policy question; meaning, it was up to either candidate to take the leap and handle the hot potato. Russert’s question: ``What could either candidate tell them about Vladimir Putin’s successor?
Obama looked like a student whose teacher caught him napping, not really sure of the answer, as he gently turned his head toward Sen. Clinton, who decided to jump in and give an informed answer about Dmitry Medvedev, the presumed winner of the upcoming election that was to be held on March 2nd, saying ``that the so-called opposition was basically run out of the political opportunity to wage a campaign against Putin's hand-picked successor, and the so-called leading opposition figure spends most of his time praising Putin. ``So this is a clever but transparent way for Putin to hold on to power, Clinton went on to say, and it raises serious issues about how we're going to deal with Russia going forward.’’
By the time Obama mulled over his answer, he had really nothing more to add to his opponent’s assessment, other than to say, ``well, I think Senator Clinton speaks accurately about him. He is somebody who was hand-picked by Putin.’’
Words not exactly gushing with Churchillian eloquence, but Obama got by without too much embarrassment. In fact, the record will probably show Mrs. Clinton came away a little more red-faced, muffing the pronunciation of Medvedev’s name toward the end of her answer.
As the junior senator inched his way past the finish-line to claim the status of being crowned the Democratic nominee, even if in name only, Mr. Obama has since batted-down criticisms on his flip-flopping on Iraq, most notably in wavering the timeline for withdrawing troops from Iraq, including his back-and-forth on how effective or ineffective the surge really has become.
Fast forward to July, 2008, and an ABC poll shows the Illinois senator's foreign policy expertise falling well short of voter’s expectations. A whopping 63 percent of the respondents, according to the poll, view John McCain more knowledgeable on world affairs; and the presumed Republican nominee tops Obama 50 to 41 percent as better able to handle an unexpected world crisis. All of which explains why this foreign tour to the Middle East and Europe becomes so critical for Obama to be taken seriously as a foreign policy statesman, almost the same way the youthful John Kennedy had to prove his credentials running against Dwight Eisenhower’s hawkish Vice President: Richard M. Nixon,
Before even touching down in Afghanistan on Saturday, critics charged Obama’s junket reeked of political posturing before ferreting out the facts and reaching his own conclusions about the war in Iraq and the best way to combat terrorism. Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman was quick to tell Fox News recently, ``He’s[Obama’s] not going to listen to (David) Petraeus. He’s not going to listen to our troops. He’s not going to listen to his own eyes with what he sees there.”
Even some European hosts were careful not to get sucked into Obama’s vacuum in using Europe as a convenient prop for political gamesmanship. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, for one, expressed cynicism of Obama using Berlin’s Brandenburg Gate as a setting for one of his planned speeches, the same place where Ronald Reagan delivered his historic `` Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall’’ speech in 1987.
Team Obama has since decided against using the Brandenburg Gate as a backdrop.
Another criticism already being voiced is that Obama, who plans to meet with foreign leaders, will push his own foreign policy agenda, even before being elected, a bold act that will not only be unprecedented, but runs the risk of upstaging the Bush administration, a ruse which might backfire on the Illinois senator with voters back home as being unpatriotic.
``My advice to Senator Obama, is to stick to very intimate settings with European leaders, and keep as low of a profile as he can’’ said Paul Cheney, Assistant Professor of European History at the University of Chicago
Despite George Bush being so unpopular as he has been with the war in Iraq, and anti-American emotion in Europe always in full display, a big reason why Obama will likely be received with an outpouring of enthusiastic well-wishers, nevertheless, some historians, like Ronald J. Granieri, Professor of Modern European History from the University of Pennsylvania cautions Mr. Obama not to overplay his hand. . ``It is also worth noting, significant changes in the leadership of major European states, especially the election of President Sarkozy in France and Chancellor Merkel in Germany, have already led to better relationships with Washington, Professor Granieri observed, so Obama and his staff should not assume that relations are still as bad with those states as they were between 2002 and 2005.’’
On the other hand, if Obama had made Charles S. Maier, Professor of History at Harvard University at the Center For European Studies, and author of ``Recasting Bourgeois Europe’’ one of his 300 policy advisors ( as reported by The New York Times), which he hasn’t, the Leverett Saltonstall scholar would have advised the Illinois senator to take a hard look at the administration’s policy of deploying anti-missiles in Eastern Europe,`` a silly idea, according to Professor Maier, that came about as a result out of cold-war reflexes in our Defense Department.’’
With the three major networks positioned to capture Obama’s every move, every speech, every syllable rolling from his lips, scouring for blunders and missteps, the presumed Democratic nominee is probably most concerned about not stepping on some landmines that could give Senator McCain reason to expose his soft spots.
Before leaving Washington for Afghanistan with Chuck Hagel, Republican of Nebraska, and Jack Reed, Democrat of Rhode Island, Obama said he was more interested in listening than talking. ``We have one president at a time."
If Obama does indeed stick to those words and spends more time listening to a wide range of opinions during his week long tour and biting his lip, instead of trying to woo the press and impress Europeans with his grasp of foreign policy issues, and what the best course of action for America is, while shooting down the failed policies of the present administration, the trip will likely be considered a resounding success, and more importantly, it will pad his resume with the American public as a versatile well-rounded candidate heading into the home stretch of the general election.
-Bill Lucey
billlucey@bellsouth.net
House of Blues: Last All-Star Game At Yankee Stadium
On Tuesday night, over 3,000 writers, journalists, and photographers will be on hand at Yankee Stadium to cover the final All-Star Game to be played in the House That Ruth Built.
Yankee Stadium has been host to the Midsummer Classic four times; the other times were in 1939 when Joltin’ Joe DiMaggio slapped a solo shot in the fifth inning to preserve an A.L. victory. The other two appearances, the National League blanked the Junior Circuit 6-0 in 1960 and 7-5 in 1977.
Taken together, New York has been host to an All-Star game eight times if you include games played at the Polo Grounds in 1934 and 1942, Ebbets Field in 1949, and Shea Stadium in 1964.
It’s only fitting, then, that Major League Baseball hold the All-Star Game in the final year at Yankees Stadium, considering the Bombers, winners of 26 World Championships and 39 American League Pennants, have suited-up 112 All-Star players, the most of any Major League team, since the Midsummer Classic was inaugurated in 1933.
With such a galaxy of stars, you’d think the Yanks would have had more All-Star MVPs. Surprisingly enough; Derek Jeter in 2000 at Turner Field in Atlanta is the only Yankee to claim the honors, when he clubbed two singles, a double, drove in a run and scored a run.
Not only is the Big Apple proud-as-punch to have the world feast its eyes on Yankee Stadium in front of a nationally televised audience, the city’s finances will benefit as well. According to the New York’s Economic Development Corporation (EDC), the All-Star Game will generate $184. 4 million in economic activity, not exactly chump change.
So for those itching for a little Yankee Stadium nostalgia and All-Star Game history, the Press Office of Major League Baseball has provided The Morning Delivery with a few historical nuggets as we prepare to crack open up a cold one and squeeze a little mustard on our pretzels for the 79th Midsummer’s Classic.
Yankee Stadium History
April 18, 1923: Yankee stadium is open for business.
74,200 fans pass through the turnstiles to watch the Bombers beat the Boston Red Sox, 4-1, in a game which included a moon shot from Babe Ruth.
November 12, 1928: Legendary Notre Dame Head Coach Knute Rockne belts out his famous half-time speech: ``Win One For the Gipper’’
The Fighting Irish beat Army, 12-8.
July 1, 1939: One of the first televised boxing matches takes place between Max Baer and Lou Nova.
October 5, 1947: The Yankees defeat cross-town rivals, the Brooklyn Dodgers in Game Seven of the World Series during the first televised World Series.
October 8, 1956: Don Larsen pitches a perfect game in Game Five of the World Series, the first time a no-hitter has ever been thrown during a Fall Classic
December 28, 1958: Considered to be the ``greatest football game ever played’’ the Baltimore Colts defeat the New York Giants, when Al Ameche lunges in from the one-yard line, scoring the winning touchdown during the first overtime in NFL history.
May 13, 1967: Mickey Mantle makes history when he blasts his 500th home-run, becoming the first switch-hitter in baseball history to accomplish such a feat.
September 28, 1976: Muhammad Ali defeats Ken Norton in a close but unanimous decision in the last boxing match to take place at Yankee Stadium.
April 20, 2006: Pope Benedict XVI celebrated Mass at Yankee Stadium, making him the third pope to appear at Yankee stadium
**
All-Star Game History
• The first All-Star Game was held at Comiskey Park in Chicago in 1933, when the AL won 3-1 on July 6th.
• FDR was the first president to attend an All-Star Game in 1937; George H.W. Bush was the last in 1992
• There was no All-Star Game in 1945 due to World War II travel restrictions.
• 2003 marked the first year the winner of the Midsummer Classic would be awarded home field advantage during the World Series.
• Satchel Paige, 47, of the St. Louis Browns, was the oldest player to appear in an All-Star Game in 1953. The youngest was the New York Mets’ Dwight Gooden, aka ``Dr. K’’, at age 19, in 1984.
• The longest nine-inning game was three hours and 38 minutes at Coors Field in Denver on July 7, 1998; the shortest was one-hour and 53 minutes at Sportsman’s Park in St. Louis on July 9th, 1940.
• The New York Yankees Lefty Gomez holds the record for most All-Star Game wins at 3 in 1933, 1935, and 1937.
• Philadelphia Phillies’ third baseman Willie Jones steps to the plate seven times (in an extra-inning game) on July 11th, 1950, a Major League record for an All-Star Game.
• Ralph Kiner smacks back-to-back-to-back home runs in 1949, 1950, and 1951
• Fred Lynn of the Boston Red Sox holds the record as the only player to belt a grand slam on July 6th, 1983.
-Bill Lucey
billlucey@bellsouth.net
Obama's Foreign Policy: Americans Learning Another Language
During a recent town hall gathering, Barack Obama griped about how so few Americans speak a foreign language, other than their native tongue.
The presumptive Democratic nominee told a crowd in Powder Springs, Ga. last week, (in a playful manner, mind you) that ``You know, it's embarrassing when Europeans come over here, they all speak English, they speak French, they speak German. And then we go over to Europe and all we can say is 'merci beaucoup!'"
The Illinois senator proceeded to encourage Americans to learn Spanish, the same as immigrants coming to the United States should speak English, a remark that ignited a wave of criticism from conservative groups who took his comments as a clear call for bilingualism. English has never been adopted as the official language of the United States in over 200 years of its history.
Admittedly, Obama did deserve to be spanked for saying American parents should make sure their children learn ``Spanish’’. After all, there are more immigrants than just Hispanics flooding U.S. streets. A growing number of Asians, Russians, and French Creole (including Haitian Creole speakers), are streaming into the U.S., struggling to master the English language, and no one is wagging their fingers at Americans for not learning those languages.
But if Mr. Obama’s key point was to encourage parents in an age of globalism and multiculturism to teach their children to become proficient in mastering a foreign language, if for no other reason than to gain a competitive edge in an ever-evolving global economy, than his point is well taken.
It was just a few years ago, when a U.S. Senate Resolution designated 2005 as the ``Year of Foreign Language Study’’ on the premise that only nine percent of U.S. citizens can speak another foreign language proficiently. An embarrassing statistic when you consider 99 percent of the citizens of Luxembourg, a country much smaller than the United States, speaks fluently in another foreign language, according to a European Survey reported by The Associated Press.
Donald L. Rubin, Professor of Cultural Diversity in the Department of Speech Communication at the University of Georgia, said he just returned from India, where there are 25 languages recognized, and most citizens, even at the lowest rungs of society speak fluently in at least two and three languages.
``Some people fear that to encourage bilingualism is to spell the doom of the English language, which would undermine a key foundation of our national identity. ``Not so. In fact, it is far more difficult to retain a non-English speaking culture in the US than most people realize’’, Rubin wrote through an email, who cited a Princeton University survey which found that over 90 percent of the grandchildren of Mexican immigrants in the US prefer to speak English rather than Spanish. The authors of the study estimate that only 5 percent of the great grandchildren of those immigrants will be able to speak Spanish.
``We need bilingual education not only to enhance English abilities among nonnative speakers, Rubin wrote, but also to keep from losing all our Spanish speakers’’
But Americans are making encouraging progress in speaking more than one language, according to a U.S. Census Bureau study, which reports 47 million people or 18 percent of the total population, speaks more than one language at home, an increase of 14 percent from 1990. The Census Bureau additionally reports other than Spanish, the sharpest increase in foreign language speakers in the U.S. is Chinese, which jumped from 1.2 million speakers to 2 million from 10 years ago. Spanish speakers grew approximately 60 percent from 1990, while the largest proportional foreign language increase was in Russian, which tripled, from 242,000 to 706,000
There is, however, some question from academics how proficient Americans reported from the Census Bureau really are in speaking foreign languages, other than being able to spit out a few popular conversational foreign phrases.
Still, interest in mastering a foreign language has shown a significant increase at colleges and universities. In November , The Modern Language Association, reported foreign language enrollment to be at its highest level since 1960, and his been growing steadily since 1998. The languages showing significant increases were Arabic (up 127%), Chinese (up 51%), and Korean (up 37%). In fact, for the first time, Arabic now ranks as one of the top ten languages being studied at higher education institutions, according to the survey.
But whether U.S. citizens embrace (and learn) foreign languages as the country absorbs immigrants at unprecedented levels, while reaping benefits from acquiring proficiency in a language other than their own, the howls from a large slice of the country, annoyed by the suggestion they’re being forced to learn another language, particularly Spanish, will undoubtedly continue well into the 21st Century.
Not only is it embarrassing that so few US citizens speak a second language, Professor Rubin told me, ``it may be down-right unpatriotic’’
-Bill Lucey
billlucey@bellsouth.net
History and the Economy Are Not On John McCain's Side
In Denver on Monday, the Arizona senator kicked off one of what is sure to be many speeches and town hall meetings dealing with the economy: specifically-job creation, tax relief and affordable health care.
With a recent CNN poll showing voters less concerned about the war in Iraq compared with a year ago, the economy has quickly become the number one concern of voters, and will likely determine who wins the November election.
Despite Obama still struggling connecting with the middle-class voters, or what were referred to during the primary season as the Dunkin Donut voters (those making $50,000 or less), Hillary Clinton’s rock-solid supporters; if history is any guide, after eight years of George W. Bush's stewardship of a mismanaged economy, McCain’s chances of winning the election are about as likely as the Washington Nationals clinching the National League pennant.
A survey of how presidential contenders fared during a ``political business cycle’’ or economic downturn, shows McCain facing an uphill battle
For example:
• James Campbell, in his book ``The American Campaign: U.S. Presidential Campaigns and the National Vote’’ reports in-party candidates running with economic growth above 1.25 percentage points have won the White House two-thirds of the time, or six out of nine elections; even those that did lose, Campbell writes, such as Richard Nixon in 1960, Hubert Humphrey in 1968, and Gerald Ford in 1976, lost by razor-thin margins.
Dwight Eisenhower, on the other hand, proved to be the lone exception, when he won the 1956 election despite less than 1.25 percent growth
• Campbell went on to document that of the 13 presidential elections between 1946 and 1996, Lyndon Johnson in 1968, Nixon in 1972, and Ronald Reagan in 1984 secured landslide victories, when the GDP grew by more than three percentage points leading up to the election.
• When economic activity declined during the first six months of the year in 1980, many economists attribute Jimmy Carter's loss to the woeful economy.
• Adlai Stevenson in 1952 and George H.W. Bush in 1992 also lost elections, many argue, due to the sluggish growth rates, resulting in the party in power being voted out of the White House.
• Jac Heckelman, Professor of Economics, at Wake Forest University, who has compiled an overview on political business cycles said ``recessions happening during presidential elections are extremely rare’’; but when they have occurred, the party in power suffered on Election Day. In 1960, Nixon (although not the incumbent lost); and in 1980, Carter was turned away by voters. From 1960-2000, according to Professor Heckelman, ``every time the misery index (unemployment plus inflation) fell relative to the previous election year, the incumbent party received more total votes than the other major party.’’ ``When the misery index rose relative to the previous election year, then only with the exception of the 1972 election, Heckelman explained, the incumbent party received fewer total votes than the main opposition party. In 1960, the misery index was exactly the same as in 1956, and the two parties basically split the popular vote (50.1%-49.9%)''
• There’s also been a great deal of anecdotal assumptions put forth, which suggests that President Bill Clinton’s approval rating after the Monica Lewinsky scandal might have been eased, somewhat, by the robust economy, the same way the Iran-Contra scandal during President Reagan’s second term was overlooked, to a large degree, by the strong economy.
• Ray C. Fair, an economist at the International Center for Finance at Yale University has developed a systematic model to predict electoral fortunes based on the economy, which suggests that each one percentage point decline in the growth rate would cost the incumbent party about 0.7 percent of the relative party vote share. Professor Heckleman interprets this analytical model to mean ``if the Republicans gather 50 percent vote share with growth rate of 2 percent, they would have only 49.3 percent with growth rate of one percent.’’
• Voters obviously place a high premium on the candidate’s economic message, so much so that Campbell reports in the``The American Campaign’’ that an analysis of the 1984, 1988, and 1992 National Elections Survey’s reveal that between 80 and 90 percent of voters evaluated the president's overall job performance the same way they evaluated his handling of the economy.
So John McCain is staring history in the face; and the findings are disheartening for the GOP. But the road from here to Election Day is, as always, filled with mines and traps. It would be foolish to brush McCain aside just yet.
It’s time for the seasoned Arizona senator to hunker down and convince voters he won’t hold his opponent’s youth and inexperience against him, but as a one-term senator, Obama is ill-prepared to handle the tough decisions needed to pull the economy out of the doldrums and back to full recovery.
-Bill Lucey
billlucey@bellsouth.net
Top Ten Signs You Know The Newspaper Industry Is In Trouble
9.) Publisher announces newspaper will become agnostic, just to weasel out of having to hire a religion writer
8.) Notice your newspaper’s new correction policy has 3 typos
7.) Newspaper type changes from large print to brail
6.) Rewrite man is Jayson Blair
5.) Redesigned home page links to Paris Hilton sex videos
4.) Newly adopted newspaper policy allows AA members be used as anonymous sources
3.) Your new layout editor thinks a sidebar is the dive down the street
2.) Paper’s new ethics manual written by Washington lobbyists.
And the number one reason you know your newspaper is in trouble:
1.) Editorial Board consists of former TMZ staffers
-Bill Lucey
billlucey@bellsouth.net
Food For Thought: Why Are Groceries So Expensive?
Imagine what a family with a whole soccer team of children to feed must be going through.
Over the last few Sunday’s (my shopping day), I’ve noticed I can’t seem to pass through the checkout line without coughing up around $100, easily $20-$25 more than I normally pay.
The first few times, I thought I must have been tossing a few extras in my shopping cart that I don’t normally buy.
The problem is: I’m a regimented shopper; I buy the same items week after week. So it hit me like a tidal wave, recently, how the food crisis has really hit home.
Over the past year in the United States, food prices have shot up about 5 percent, more than double from the previous 10 year rate. Currently, annual food price inflation is running at 3 percent; the highest since the 1990's when it stood at 5.8 percent, according to Mike Walden, economist in the Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics of North Carolina State University..
Peter Timmer, meanwhile, Senior Fellow at the Center for Global Development, USA, said the last time the United States witnessed such a dramatic increase in food prices was in 1973-74, when there was a worldwide food crisis; and before that during the 1951 Korean War commodity boom.
Another alarming piece of data I learned: world market prices for major food commodities, such as grain and vegetable oils have risen to more than 60 percent from where they stood two years ago
So I did a little investigating to get to the bottom of this recent climb in my grocery bill, to find out what’s at the root cause of it.
My findings:
• The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) confirms pretty much what we already know; which is, food is projected to increase 4.5 to 5.5 percent, as retailers continue to pass on higher commodity and energy costs to consumers in the form of higher retail prices.
• Don’t look now, but the commodities expected to increase the most, include poultry, fats and oils, processed fruits and vegetables, sugars and sweets, cereals and bakery products, according to the latest projections compiled by the Consumer Price Index. (CPI).
What’s causing this shocking spike in commodities?
According to a May, 2008 report issued by the Economic Research Service of the USDA, global consumption of meat has been growing more rapidly than consumption of grains and oilseed. Between 1985 and 1990, the USDA reports, production of beef, pork, chicken and turkey has risen more than 3 percent annually
Added to this, rapid economic growth in China and India, which accounts for 40 percent of the world's population, seeking to add more protein to their diet, has accelerated the demand for agriculture products; while an increase in petroleum in developing countries, dating back to 1999, has significantly contributed to rising oil prices. Oil imports of China alone, for example, has grown 20 percent from 166 million barrels in 1996 to 1.06 billion barrels in 2006
The energy crisis, of course, goes hand-in-hand with increased distribution and transportation costs. More importantly, as the U.S. dollar began to depreciate in 2002 and lost value relative to the currency of importing countries, the depreciation of the dollar raised prices; while the increase in global demand for oil, (due to rapid growth in developing countries), put further strains on the world prices of crude oil; so that by 2004, oil prices began to rise more rapidly than previous years.
And according to Edmund Estes from the Department of Agriculture and Resource Economics at North Carolina State University, mandated use and tax incentives for biofuels (corn for ethanol and biodiesel for soybeans) has increased demand and price for coarse grains, which includes wheat, corn, and soybeans. ``Price increases for coarse grains have a profound impact on all prices since they are the foundation ingredient for many other foods'', Professor Estes points out.
Acquiring water for agriculture use is becoming more difficult due to the increased expense of gravity-flow irrigation systems; and another often overlooked demand for agriculture products and energy is attributable to the rising worldwide population, which has increased by 75 million or 1.1 percent a year, despite the downward trend since the 1970's
Adverse world-wide weather conditions is yet another factor attributable to the food crisis, according to the 2007 data from USDA. Northern Europe, for example, witnessed a dry spring; Southeast Europe went through a drought; for the second consecutive year, the Ukraine and Russia experienced similar droughts; large swaths of the United States, had crops and yield wiped out due to multi-day freeze; Canada went through a hot and dry summer, resulting in lower yields for wheat, barley and rapeseed; Northwest Africa suffered a drought in key wheat and barley growing areas; Turkey had a drought that reduced yields in it nonirrigated production areas; Australia recently withstood another drought, for the third year in a row, triggering low grain yields with exports plummeting; and Argentina endured a late freeze that was quickly compounded by a drought, reducing corn and barley yields
If you have any doubts whether we’re in a worldwide food crisis, look no further than the tumultuous riots in some of the more low-income food-deficit countries, including: Guinea, Niger, Ethiopia, Mexico, Bangladesh, Haiti, Indonesia, Morocco and Senegal. More controlled demonstrations have taken place with millers and bakers in Malaysia, in Indonesia over soybeans and meats, meat marketers in Pakistan; while Peruvian farmers blockaded rail lines, protesting rising fertilizer costs; and the National Labor Federation in South Africa demonstrated against spiraling food and electricity prices
But there is a silver lining as we head into the July 4th weekend
Compared with the rest of the world, citizens of the United States who spend 10 percent of their disposable income on food, according to the USDA, has not been as severely impacted by the food crisis, at least according to Professor Edes, who informs me Japanese residents spend 13 percent of their income on food, France spends 14 percent, Mexico 21 percent, China 28 percent, and in India a staggering 40 percent. In addition, fuel often exceeds more than $9.00 a gallon in most of Europe.
-Bill Lucey
billlucey@bellsouth.net
Guns N' Justices: Welcome To The Jungle
In a contentious split decision (5-4) on Thursday, The U.S. Supreme Court ruled the constitution does not permit `` the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home’’, according to Justice Anthony Scalia writing for the majority.
Scalia in affirming the Second Amendment (originally ratified in 1791), which states that a ``well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed’’ was quick to point out the decision won't overturn handgun restrictions to the mentally ill, felons, and the bans already in place in government building and schools.
Ever since the historic decision was handed down, however, the floodgates by pro-gun activists, particularly the National Rifle Association (NRA) have opened up; with plans for legal challenges in Chicago (where ever since 1982, it’s illegal to possess a handgun within city limits) and San Francisco (where those living in public housing are restricted from purchasing hand guns), including a host of other suburbs, threatening similar action.
The problem so many are having with this decision and the hazy interpretation of the Second Amendment is how the right to bear arms is interpreted by hunters, and law abiding citizens (protecting themselves from assault) with euphoria; and utter fear by others citizens worried that the streets of some our major urban centers might turn into a vignette of Al Pacino’s Scarface.
In addition to the concern of handgun restrictions being reversed in the District of Columbia, Chicago, and San Francisco, The Brady Campaign website reports, other states, including South Carolina, Tennessee, Nevada, Florida and Louisiana, have ``virtually no laws in place that stop firearm trafficking or prevent dangerous people from gaining easy access to dangerous weapons.''
I’ll leave it to the legal scholars and the George Will’s of the world to rhapsodize about the brilliance of the Second Amendment in how it preserves our constitutional heritage to own and possess firearms, but for someone like myself who not so long ago had the barrel of a handgun pointing at them on a dimly lit street in downtown Fort Lauderdale, I can only look at the frightening facts about handguns in America, and wonder whether the Supreme Court might have given license to urban warfare.
Just consider these facts:
• In the book, The Culture of Violence, the authors point out in 1960, only 19 percent of homicides could be traced to handguns; by 1990, the figure leaped to 69 percent.
• The John Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, reports firearms are used in more than 30 homicides per day in the United States.
• According to The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, in 2004, almost eight young people aged 19 and under were killed a day in gun homicides, suicides and unintentional shootings in the United States.
• Also from the Brady Campaign, in 2005, 30,694 people in the United States died from firearm-related deaths – 12,352 were murdered; 17,002 killed themselves; 789 were accidents
• According to the U.S. Department of Justice, of the 10,100, firearm deaths in 2005, 7,543 were committed by handguns, comprising 87.3 percent of homicides
• The U.S. Department of Justice additionally reports in 2005, 55 percent of homicides were committed with handguns, 16 percent with other guns, 14 percent with knives, 5 percent with blunt objects, and 11 percent with other weapons.
• Phillip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig writing in the 2006 Journal of Policy Analysis and Management report 30,136 Americans died by gunfire in 2003, a statistic which includes homicide, suicide, and accident
• According to the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, in 2004, firearms were used to murder 56 people in Australia, 184 people in Canada, 73 people in England and Wales, 5 people in New Zealand, and 37 people in Sweden. A small number when you consider in the United States, firearms in the same year were used to murder 11,344
• In a 2005 report issued by the Israeli Police, the incidence of investigations into murders and attempted murders was 2.5 for every 100,000 people; in the Netherlands, by comparison, it was 11.3, Italy was 3.8, France 3.5, Denmark 3.4, Germany 3.0, Switzerland 2.9, and Spain 2.8. Slovakia, the Czech republic, Austria and Greece were lower than Israel (ranging from 2.1 to 2.3), according to Gabriella Blum, Assistant Professor of Law from Harvard University
Despite the gloomy outlook of handguns and the danger they pose, there has been significant progress made since President John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr., and Bobby Kennedy were killed by gunfire.
Among them:
• The 1968 Gun Control Act outlawed gun purchasers of convicted felons, fugitives, minors, individuals with a history of mental illness, those dishonorably discharged from the military and illegal aliens. In addition, mail-order sales of firearms, such as the rifle acquired by Lee Harvey Oswald have been banned.
• The 1994 Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, among other stipulations, requires background checks of prospective buyers, which the latest research shows has denied 3 percent of handguns to potential buyers.
• New Jersey requires potential gun buyers to undergo an extensive background check by the police, including fingerprinting.
• California ranks first in the nation in implementing mandatory background checks on all firearm purchases, through a “one-handgun-a-month” law to prevent bulk purchases from feeding the illegal gun market.
NOTE: To see how your state measures up, refer to the Brady Campaign state-by-state scorecard
• The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) report due to more demanding licensing requirements, the number of federal firearms licenses, has been sliced from 284,000 in 1993 to 109,000 by 2007.
Whether the Supreme Court interpreted the original intent of the framers correctly or not; it’s safe to assume the logic of their decision, and what impact it will have on individual states, has opened up a new spirited battle between the NRA and the anti-gun activists for years to come.
-Bill Lucey
billlucey@bellsouth.net
Holiday Tourists Won't Catch A Break At The Gas Pumps
Tammy Heppner from the Energy Information Administration (EIA) informs me they are expecting prices of gas to increase five to 10 cents from where they are now ($4.08) by the time the holiday weekend rolls around, an assessment consistent with the Short-Term Energy Outlook, which projects $4.13 a gallon in July and $4.15 in August.
Heppner, responding through an email, thinks``the lower gasoline demand seen this spring and a decrease in travelers over Memorial Day weekend would suggest that travel would be down versus 2007 for the July 4th weekend.’’
The American Automobile Association (AAA), meanwhile reports today there will be a decline in the number of Americans traveling during the Fourth of July holiday travel period, the first decline this decade.
``Clearly gas prices are continuing to take a toll on the traveler’s budget, but the travel industry is responding, as they have in the past, with discounts, promotions and other incentives to get people traveling this holiday” AAA President and CEO Robert L. Darbelnet wrote through a press release. “For instance travelers should look out for free gas card offerings, breakfast promotions, kids-eat-free deals, car rental discounts and, of course, always ask about AAA member discounts.”
Other highlights from the AAA Press Release:
1.) AAA projects 40.45 million Americans will still travel during the July 4th holiday weekend, down 1.3 percent, or nearly 550,000 Americans, from the 41 million who traveled last year
2.) Approximately 4.54 million Americans (11 percent of holiday travelers) expect to travel by airplane, a 2.3 percent decrease from the 4.64 million who flew last year. Nearly 1.7 million plan to travel by train, bus or other mode of transportation
And for you nostalgia buffs wondering how much gasoline cost at the pumps in previous years, consider that 10 years ago, gas averaged $1.04 per gallon on July 6th, 1998; and only three years ago, consumers were averaging $2.18 at the pumps on July 4th, 2005, according to the EIA historical data
Maybe John McCain and Barack Obama will strike a cord with voters if they slip on one of those old Texaco suits and become full-service attendants over the holiday weekend.
-Bill Lucey
billlucey@bellsouth.net
George Carlin Left Us Laughing
By far, my most memorable Carlin routine is when he compared America’s national pastime, baseball to the National Football League.
Here’s a sampling:
``In football, you wear a helmet… in baseball, you wear cap’’
``Football is concerned with downs. "What down is it?.... Baseball is concerned with ups. "Who's up? Are you up? I'm not up! He's up. ‘’
``Baseball has the seventh-inning stretch… Football has the two-minute warning’’
It was a Carlin classic, to be sure, and one that makes me break into laughter every time I hear it.
Of course, you can’t think of the irreverent counterculture comic without calling to mind his controversial routine: ``7 Dirty Words You Can Never Say On Television’’, first delivered on July 21, 1972, at Milwaukee’s Summerfest, leading to his arrest for violating obscenity laws. The charges were dismissed later that year.
As a tribute to the Bronx native’s classic, The Morning Delivery came up with ``Seven Things You Can’t Say To Certain People''
1.) One of seven things you can’t say to Jennifer Aniston: ``Hey Jenn, do you know any Hollywood actresses with tattoos you can set me up with?
2.) One of seven things you can’t say to James Carville: ``Mr. Carville, it must have been a hair-raising experience running Bill Clinton’s campaign?''
3.) One of seven things you can’t say to former Vice President Al Gore: ``Mr. Gore, can you explain the beauty of our Electoral College System?
4.) One of seven things you can’t say to Hillary Clinton. ``Duck!, Mrs. Clinton, I think we’re being hit with sniper fire’’!
5.) One of seven things you can’t say to former Vice President Dan Quayle: ``Mr. Quayle, how do you spell potato
6.) One of seven things John McCain can’t say to Barack Obama? ``Sen. Obama, how about we settle this election bowling a few frames?
7.) One of seven things Barack Obama can’t say to John McCain? ``Say John, how about we take to the waves and go waterboarding this afternoon?
-Bill Lucey
billlucey@bellsouth.net