Stoopid

Obama's first 100 days have been long over, so surely all the major PR crises are over right? Wrong. The ever popular Prez can, believe it or not, make mistakes as he very clearly did this week in reference to the arrest of a popular (and African-American) Harvard professor, arrested after local witnesses believed him to be forcing entry, into what turned out to be his own home. The professor himself accused the local cops of racism and Obama commented that

"The Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home."

However, the controversy emerged because Obama put the arrest in the context of

"the long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately".

As Obama is clearly now a key representative of African-American issues, many have been waiting for a racial incident such as this to emerge, so as to see how the President would react. Would he be impartial or write a rap about it? (O.k. so stereotypes to the extreme and that but you get the deal). Would ghettObama find his way out? Most of all would racial issues be his downfall being the sensitive subject matter they are? Since the hesitation of many white voters in the '08 election was a fear of 'blacks coming first' (however unjustified, ignorant and a bit American (!) that may be) if Obama tipped the balance even slightly the reaction could well be uproar. Luckily however the man knows when he needs to save the situation. He curtly and carefully commented

"Because this has been ratcheting up and I obviously helped to contribute ratcheting it up, I wanted to make clear in my choice of words I think I unfortunately gave an impression that I was maligning the Cambridge Police Department or Sgt Crowley specifically"

And with that BO dug himself out of his very deep hole.

All Animals Are Equal, But Some Are More Equal Than Others

So Gordon Brown has become the laughing stock of the media, especially since his government has pretty much come undone. He is a figure of mockery, and a focal point of satirical comedy, not least using his physical flaws. Jeremy Clarkson has become known for his controversial, sometimes even dangerous remarks, usually resulting in pleased fans and outraged opposers. These two elements have not married well. Last year they married to create a PR crisis for Clarkson when he called the PM a "one-eyed Scottish idiot", and subsequently was forced to apologise. Lesson learned right?

Uhhh no. When discussing public policy Clarkson said "The reason you can't do that is because Gordon Brown is a ----." The ---- refers to c*nt case you were wondering. As the Telegraph put it the "four-letter swear word generally considered to be the most offensive in the English language" (LOL). No apology has been issued yet, but Clarkson did get a good talking to by one of the producers following the show. However, I have an issue with this. Yes indeed the word used by Clarkson is a very offensive one, but it is one that has been used by many a comedian to describe our PM. Similarly, the remark was made during a not-for-broadcast section of the show, in front of an adult audience who, presumably, have at least some level of understanding of Clarkson's humour and are most likely to be fans of it. And, although mainstream media may not use that specific word to describe Brown, it is generally the implication that he is absolutely useless, such is his reputation degraded and dirtied. And that is why that infamous quote from Animal Farm is the title of this entry. In the end, isn't Clarkson just vocalising general opinion? And doesn't he have a right to say what he will in the situation he was in?

The Biggest Quitter

So the former almost-VP/future almost-Prez/possible 2010 Senator/ (and most importantly) Governor of Alaska Ms Sarah Palin just quit the latter role. Her vague reasoning culminated in her blaming the media's poor coverage of herself putting too much pressure on her family. It's notable that for once though, the media have not lied. Every item about Sarah Palin has been fuelled by something she or her family has done or said or been investigated for. The fact that the adding of SP to McCain's ticket was a blatant grab for headlines by the GOP last August, when his far more charismatic, youthful and inspiring opponent was getting over 75% of the election as a wholes media coverage, wasn't discussed. The fact that her, now famously, teen mom daughter has taken it upon herself to group with stars such as Hayden Pannetiere to promote sex education (and thus grab headlines) was not discussed either. Most notably, whether Palin will run for that useful Senate seat (useful because that's where most Prez's come from) or for the top office in 2010 (she's already said she could pip Obama to the post) was absolutely not discussed. In fact most of the questions people wanted to ask SP were not discussed. With so many questions left unanswered Sarah Palin remains headline news, and with 2010 heralding the arrival of both Senate elections and the beginning of the Presidential Election campaign, the next year could be a big one for the Hockey Mom from Alaska. What'll happen to this, ahem, shy wallflower? Only time will tell....

Honestly I haven't a clue

So it's been a few weeks since the expenses row emerged, and the storm has pretty much blown over (for now). The only notable action to address these issues, so far, has been based on individual MPs, most significantly our Shadow Chancellor, a certain Mr Osborne, is being investigated by the Parliamentary Standards Commission. It's interesting that he was dogged in by his constituency's Labour Party leader. Petty playground politics? Time will tell.


Two pieces of legislation this week attempted to inject some much needed honesty into British Political life.

1. Parliamentary Standards Bill (edit) - MPs rejected at first the bill that proposed that, as a way of removing some of the expenses controversy, their words, as spoken in Parliament, could be used as evidence in court. Since honesty has never been particularly fashionable among MPs the bill was immediately rejected, with backbenchers including Margaret Beckett, rebelling against their party. However, other features such as the creation of an Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, were widely supported. Although this does seem kinda fun and helpful it also appears that this has all happened before (*cough* Parliamentary Standards Commission *cough*). The bill got passed once Parliamentary Privilege (the whole court thing) was restored.


2. Disclosing Second Jobs - Since MPs love money even more than the rest of us, second jobs are another way of raking even more in. However, remember these peeps are supposed to be representing us, and our interests, in Parliament. If there off being an accountant I doubt they're considering your local hospital, in that particular Parliamentary debate, or in that committee. On Wednesday 1st July, however, MPs voted in favour of a bill suggesting they declare outside interests. How coincidentally good for their images! However, it is not yet a criminal offence for them to not declare.

So there you go. Honesty is (sort of) the best policy - especially if you're trying to win reelection. However, I somehow doubt it'll pay off, unless something even more controversial happens to the Tories, and that is gonna be hard. Time to start digging Gordy.