Let’s see what’s in the news. Arafat’s health is bad but some reports have said it’s stabilized a bit. He’s arrived in Paris for treatment for what is believed to be cancer. The economy grew slower than expected. Also in economic news, China has raised its interest rate. It’s a wise step to control their grown and ensure that inflation is kept in pace. Must be crazy to live in China these days. Early elections are on the rise, mired with issues arleady in Florida. In fact, I’ll be voting early at City Hall this Saturday since I’ll be out of the country on election day. Friday’s Zogby has Bush and Kerry in a dead heat, with 47% each. It seems as the number of undecidedes are going down towards zero, and compared to last year Bush had a 3 point lead on Gore. And to end, I’ll leave with a quote from the Economist‘s backing of Kerry.
YOU might have thought that, three years after a devastating terrorist attack on American soil, a period which has featured two wars, radical political and economic legislation, and an adjustment to one of the biggest stockmarket crashes in history, the campaign for the presidency would be an especially elevated and notable affair. If so, you would be wrong. This year’s battle has been between two deeply flawed men: George Bush, who has been a radical, transforming president but who has never seemed truly up to the job, let alone his own ambitions for it; and John Kerry, who often seems to have made up his mind conclusively about something only once, and that was 30 years ago. But on November 2nd, Americans must make their choice, as must The Economist. It is far from an easy call, especially against the backdrop of a turbulent, dangerous world. But, on balance, our instinct is towards change rather than continuity: Mr Kerry, not Mr Bush.
I just had to pull out the bit where they talk about Guantanamo:
The biggest mistake, though, was one that will haunt America for years to come. It lay in dealing with prisoners-of-war by sending hundreds of them to the American base at Guantánamo Bay in Cuba, putting them in a legal limbo, outside the Geneva conventions and outside America’s own legal system. That act reflected a genuinely difficult problem: that of having captured people of unknown status but many of whom probably did want to kill Americans, at a time when to set them free would have been politically controversial, to say the least. That difficulty cannot neutralise the damage caused by this decision, however. Today, Guantánamo Bay offers constant evidence of America’s hypocrisy, evidence that is disturbing for those who sympathise with it, cause-affirming for those who hate it. This administration, which claims to be fighting for justice, the rule of law and liberty, is incarcerating hundreds of people, whether innocent or guilty, without trial or access to legal representation. The White House’s proposed remedy, namely military tribunals, merely compounds the problem.