Various Notions, Volume 1

Welcome to the first of what I hope will become semi-regular postings of "Various Notions."  In each volume, I hope to discuss several topics--in succession, not all at once.  This will allow me to discuss some topics that seem discussion-worthy but that get put on the permanent back-burner as I focus on any one major topic at a time.  It will also allow readers to let me know what topics I should pursue in more depth, if they choose to do so. (I will of course continue to provide single-issue "regular" posts, as well.)

So, here goes....

INDIA AS INTERNATIONAL POWER BROKER?

In my zeal to discuss what I (and others) view as the emerging mega-super-power alliances of North America/Europe on the one hand and China/Russia on the other (for more information on this topic, please see the "...Multi-Polar World..." post directly preceding this one, below), I neglected to mention the increasingly important role that India will have to play insofar as tipping the scales in one direction or another is concerned.  I had planned to discuss India's emerging role, but I got caught up with discussing the principal players of the two alliances and simply forgot to give India its due.  I hope to rectify that, at least a bit, right now.

According to the "U.S. Council on Foreign Relations" website, between 1992 and 2005 "bilateral trade between India and China has gone from $332 million in 1992 to $13.6 billion in 2005; in recent years, trade between those two countries has grown at or above the rate of 30% per year."  And, given India's strong economic connections with South Africa (it accounts in a general sense for a majority of the "economic activity" in South Africa; connections between the two countries are woven indelibly into history, such as can be seen in the fact that prior to taking up his own country's struggles, Gandhi was involved heavily in similar struggles in South Africa), India could provide China, the latter of which has worked tirelessly over the past decade to create a foothold in many of Africa's various economies, with another big opportunity to make money and spread influence on that continent.  (The U.S. and several E.U. countries, such as Britain and France, have countered with various proposals to further their own influence in Africa, ranging from energy development deals to the Bush Administration's military proposal "AFCOM.")

India has close ties to Europe, and particularly Great Britain (India was, of course, a British colony, and as such subject to the crown until just after World War II), so it's quite natural that it would do a lot of business with the European Union.  And it has increased its ties to the U.S., as well:  between 2001 and 2006, several international watch-dog groups reported that U.S. trade with India more than doubled; the U.S. and India are working in an increasingly close manner on energy development plans on the Indian subcontinent (which would provide greater energy sources for Indians while hopefully working to curb, at least to a certain extent, concerns regarding environmental fallout from the increased energy use such plans would put into effect); and President George W. Bush, working through Indian political leaders and U.S. ties to Indian commerce, has aggressively courted Indian business and industry, in the hopes of working to counterbalance China's influence in that critical country's economy.

India may very well find itself in the position of "International Power Broker" in the coming decades.  By this I mean that, once the China/Russia alliance nears economic maturity (and therefore becomes a more powerful political partnership), India might choose to throw its growing influence a bit more behind one side or the other, which could and probably would tip the scales of power in favor of either the North America/Europe alliance or the China/Russia alliance.  (This would greatly increase India's power and influence over one alliance or the other.)  Or, India could do something very tricky indeed:  it could somehow manage to continue to walk the tightrope between the two emerging mega-superpower groups, playing each side off of the other, to the consternation of both sides but the possible benefit (at least geo-politically) of India.

Remember, there are about a billion people in India, and with sales of new, low-cost cars presently soaring in major Indian cities--as well as with business and technology companies moving into India and setting deep roots there--its economy is poised to make a major impact on the world markets for decades to come.  If you think we've already seen a good deal of the extent of India's economic influence on the global economy, think again.

ELWYN TINKLENBERG FOR CONGRESS

I often stay away from making public endorsements of particular political candidates.  I simply tend to vote (at the polls if I'm in the U.S.; via absentee ballot if I'm in Europe) for the candidate I think is the best fit for each particular job.  (Sometimes this has to do with each candidate's background experience; other times it has to do with policy proposals; most often, it's due to a combination of both.)  This means that I don't cast votes in a party-partisan manner, though the majority of my votes tend to favor Democrats over Republicans.

I broke this non-endorsement trend when I endorsed New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson for the Democratic nomination for the presidency in July of 2007 (he has long-since impressed me both from the standpoint of background experience and the standpoint of domestic and foreign policy proposals).  I am about to break it again.

I was born and raised in Minnesota, and recently I had the pleasure of attending a party at a friend's house in the Saint Paul suburbs.  Present at the party was Elwyn Tinklenberg, who would soon go on to win the Democratic nod to challenge incumbent Republican Michele Bachman for the U.S. House of Representatives seat from Minnesota's 6th District.  (He won the nod just this past weekend.)  He is a former Minnesota Transportation Commissioner (he was picked to serve in the Ventura Administration, which he said came as "a big surprise to me"; he served during a time when Minnesota's roads were in better shape than they seem at present...) and a former mayor of the Twin Cities' suburb of Blaine.

Mr. Tinklenberg was surrounded by folks peppering him with questions when I arrived at the party, so I meandered elsewhere on the premises, but he surprised me by seeking me out in order to ask questions about the increasingly farcical mayoral race in London, England (between Ken "I-Love-Hugo-Chavez" Livingstone and Boris "I'm-A-Reminder-Of-What-Was-Wrong-When-The-Aristocracy-Controlled-Everything" Johnson), as well as my ideas regarding making the process of legal immigration to the United States more efficient (and thereby working in a productive and pragmatic manner to cut down on a certain amount of illegal immigration).

I cannot vote for Mr. Tinklenberg in the autumn election, as I do not live in his congressional district (in fact, I have never lived in his congressional district).  He apparently knew that prior to talking to me, and it didn't seem to bother him, as we talked for twenty or twenty-five minutes, during which time I found him intelligent, well-schooled on domestic affairs, in possession of far more knowledge of foreign affairs than an "Average Joe" congressional nominee (and eager to learn more about foreign affairs), and often humorous.

He is also running against one of the most notoriously embarrassing members of the entire U.S. House of Representatives (of which there are 435 total members), Michele Bachman.  Representative Bachman is notorious in the state of Minnesota for many depressing reasons, and she is rather infamous nationwide for "hugging" President George W. Bush on national television--immediately after he delivered a State of the Union Address a few years ago--in a manner that suggested she would soon have to cook him a hearty meal and buy him flowers while promising to "respect him in the morning."

Elwyn "El" Tinklenberg is a human being, and therefore has personal and political flaws (and he will have to overcome the emerging charge that he is overly "liberal" to fully represent the voters in his often Republican-leaning district), but he is also a sturdy and logical thinker, an engaging speaker, and an experienced politician.  And he is surely an improvement over the one-person hijinks roadshow that is Ms. Bachman.

THEY JUST DON'T MAKE REDENBACHER-CLONES LIKE THEY USED TO

I'm beginning to think that Dr. Neil Clarke Warren (of eHarmony.com) looks like deceased popcorn guru Orville Redenbacher, and to a creepy extent.  At the very least, he looks like what my memory suggests Orville Redenbacher looked like (I have yet to compare pictures of the two gentlemen; perhaps Dr. Warren looks a bit more like a cross between Mr. Redenbacher and Fred Rogers....).

The difference between Dr. Warren and Mr. Redenbacher, as far as I'm concerned, is that Dr. Warren does not have that naturally avuncular way about him that Mr. Redenbacher (and Mr. Rogers, for that matter) had.  I just get the sense that Dr. Warren isn't the person his television commercials would suggest he is, though I have no real-life evidence for this.

Do you think Dr. Warren would have accepted either Mr. Redenbacher or Mr. Rogers into the pool of love-lorn potential love connections for the ladies of eHarmony.com, if those two gentlemen were still alive and suddenly became single people?  Or would they be amongst the folks that Dr. Warren's organization rejects?

Why do I think that Dr. Warren would have rejected these fine gentlemen from his organization?  Does he possess some insidious quality, hidden on the surface, that translates itself to others by osmosis?  Or am I, for some reason, projecting such negative qualities onto him in a mean-spirited manner?

Or is this simply what happens when you eat popcorn (for the first time in six months or so) while watching television as an eHarmony.com commercial comes on?

V.P. PICKS (for the week of April 28, 2008)

Everyone else seems to be doing it, so why not me?  Here are the people I think would currently make the best V.P. picks for Senators Obama and McCain (I am leaving Senator Clinton's possible V.P. picks off the list for now because she is presently trailing Senator Obama in the Democratic delegate count; this scenario will obviously change if she overtakes him--but there is really only one big leader on her list right now, anyway, given his...well...current lead over her:  Barack Obama):

Barack Obama's Top Five

1.)  Joe Biden.  He's tough, tenacious, whip-smart in debates, experienced regarding foreign affairs, and he'd be the perfect tag-team partner to have swinging back at those who will throw mud at Senator Obama.  He seems like more of a "president" than "vice president," but that's of little concern right now, given the superficial-but-oddly-effective ammunition the Republican attack machine now has to hurl at Senator Obama should he win the Democratic party's nomination.

2.)  Wesley Clark.  He's leapfrogged from about #6 to #2 because, as a supporter of Senator Clinton, a former (successful) military man, and a former candidate for the presidency (during which he learned a lot about successful vs. unsuccessful campaigning methods), he could unite both the Clintonian and the conservative wings of the Democratic party (often, though not always, the same thing) to Senator Obama's cause.  He'd also score big points with independent voters, given the mixture of his Democratic politics and military service.

3.)  Sam Nunn.  He's a bit old for the V.P. job (he'll be 70 by the time the general election rolls around), but he's a foreign policy expert, an ex-three-term U.S. Senator, a successful businessman, and the head of the NTI (Nuclear Threat Initiative), which works to reduce the threat of nuclear warfare around the globe.  He is also a Southerner who could put his state of Georgia in play.

4.)  Bill Richardson.  This guy has "Secretary of State" written all over him.  His resume' is astounding (U.S. House of Representatives; U.S. Ambassador to the U.N.; U.S. Secretary of Energy; Governor of New Mexico; international hostage negotiator and liaison; etc.; etc.).  He would make a great V.P. pick, too, for many reasons, including his potential appeal to Hispanics and independent voters...but the Clintonians presently hate him for endorsing Senator Obama.  So choosing him for V.P. might be risky.  I'd go with him for Secretary of State, should Senator Obama win the general election.  He'd be a great choice for that post.

5.)  Kathleen Sebelius.  She is the present, popular Governor of Kansas who could bring that ruby-red state into play for the Democrats in the general election (and perhaps help tip the scales of nearby swing-states such as Missouri and Colorado).  She is also, obviously, a woman, which might assuage some residual anger felt by many fervent Clinton supporters, a large percentage of whom are older white women (and older white women make up a large chunk of the Democratic party base).  She isn't "too liberal" to be a drag on the ticket, and she isn't "too conservative" to turn off liberal voters.  Her one drawback is that she lacks extensive foreign policy experience.

John McCain's Top Five

1.)  Tom Ridge.  He is pretty-much pro-choice on abortion, which may anger conservatives, but then again his potential boss, Senator McCain, is pro-life on that issue, so that drawback might be neutralized by that fact.  He is tough-looking and tough-sounding, and he was a popular former Republican Governor of Pennsylvania (and member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Pennsylvania), so he could really put pressure on the Democrats to spend-spend-spend in order to win Pennsylvania while the Republicans work hard elsewhere.  He also served as the first Homeland Director (in the Department of Homeland Security), which is a benefit in that he knows that important playing field, but it is a detriment in that he might get tied too closely to the Bush Administration during the campaign season.  At any rate, he projects strength, physical and otherwise, and he's not known for being "very-conservative," so he could appeal to independents in swing states.

2.)  Rob Portman.  Here are his drawbacks:  he's worked in the Bush White House and he's an unknown quantity to "Average Joe" voters.  He's also far, far less than exciting.  Here's why he's #2 on this list:  he's known to be a solid Director of the Office of Budget and Management (given what the Bush Administration has given him to work with); he has extensive foreign policy credentials (he was the head U.S. Trade Representative prior to working in the Office of Budget and Management); and he spent several terms as a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, so he knows the ins and outs of that particular legislative body.  He is also from a critical swing-state:  Ohio.

3.)  John Thune.  He's from South Dakota, so that might hurt his chances.  But he is young (47), was a multiple-term member of the U.S. House of Representatives, defeated then-Majority Leader Tom Daschle to become a member of the U.S. Senate (which won him a lot of political capital in his party), is more conservative than Senator McCain, and simply looks the part of "Refreshing Young Upstart."  If several other possibilites fall apart, look for him to sneak into the running mate position.

4.)  Tim Pawlenty.  The Governor of Minnesota is young (47), conservative, and has won two terms as Minnesota's governor, which included winning re-election in a close 2006 race (when Republicans were radioactive and, in Minnesota, lost a lot of seats, both state-wide and nationally).  He is also eerily--almost creepily--ingratiating in a home-spun sort of way, and he is from a swing-state.  The drawbacks include the fact that his foreign policy experience, though improving, is still a bit sketchy, and it's an open question whether he could deliver Minnesota's ten electoral votes in November (though he could help with nearby states Wisconsin and Iowa).  He is also a long-time friend of Senator McCain.

5.)  Sarah Palin.  Why not?  Who cares if she's the Governor of already-conservative Alaska?  She's female, young (44), conservative, and attractive (and those four aspects might be just what Senator McCain needs insofar as balancing the ticket is concerned).  She does not have a lot of foreign policy experience, and she hasn't been governor for long, but her approval ratings are through the roof, and her concern for global warming issues shows that she has a maverick streak that dovetails with Senator McCain's.

* (Note:  I left other names, such as Condoleeza Rice and Colin Powell, off the list because they have shown little appetite for the job of V.P.  We'll see if that lasts.)