Obama, you've got some 60 odd days for your official fun to begin, and for reality to catch up with and overtake the fantasy and the honeymoon. 

Now, Bill Clinton enjoyed the gift of the arrival of the  Internet; I wonder, Mr. Obama, what exactly do you "hope" will arrive to turbocharge and rescue our current commerce and lifestyle quicksand? 

As I understand it, you are going to reinvent the auto industry, give the gift of universal health-care to legals and illegals alike, solve our banking horrors with your lengthy economic expertise, chat the world into pacifism, refrain from nasty domestic oil enterprises through the pursuit of easily-implemented, non-nuclear alternative methodology... while giving the vast majority of citizens and uninvited "guests" a tax cut.  You are indeed amazing.  I can't wait for you to ascend to the throne.  Oh happy day.  Michelle surely is going to be proud of the U.S., once you fix everything.

This election campaign was not the test;  This was but the AUDITION for the test.  NOW comes the test!

• Will the citizens suddenly get "good affordable" healthcare?  (Are you crossing your naïve fingers?)
• Will the Middle East become a peaceful corner of the world, as Iraq is left to flail on its own.
• Will Obama fulfill the pledge to get bin Laden, even in Pakistan?
• Will the world order be cozy under the shadows of Russian territorial aggression and Iranian nuclear armament?
• Will the world now be peaceful and begin treating its neighbors with gentle tenderness and civility, now that the German youth got the US president they wanted so badly?
• Will the world now root for the US?  Instead of rooting for its demise?  Will we try to purchase this friendship, if it isn't offered freely?
• Will the world now treat the U.S. with favor and respect?  I suspect it will indeed happen in every corner where we BUY our friendship or SURRENDER our power, advantage, and/or PERCEIVED wealth.  How hollow a victory that will be.
• Will terrorists and fanatics leave the United States and its citizens alone now that the US is "cool" and progressive; tolerant to gays, drugs, and progressive lifestyles?
• Will our profound debt and deficits enjoy recovery under a tax-and-spend full democratic majority?
• Will the economy become rosy as the complete absence of the appropriate blame for our economic demise persists in government and policy ?
• Will gas prices go and remain down as the new democratic majority resists domestic oil exploration?
• Will our states no longer begin forming lines for billion-dollar cash bailouts to recover their state budget fiascoes, (which are awfully hard to trace to George Bush)?
• Will crime rates diminish?  (Like in Obama's home Chicago?)
• Is racism over? It should be.  Will the indignation fade, at the least?  Will entitlements, targeted welfare, and minority quotas be repealed for a true new colorblind society?
• Will homelessness and poverty subside under Obama's wise intervention? (Like in Obama's home Chicago?)
• Will we now see illegal immigration cease to rain chaos on the structure, predictability, and budgets of our cities and rural districts.
• Will our cynicism fade, as we watch a government suddenly begin to function and pursue our nation's best interests with Nancy Pelosi's promised bi-partisan efforts?
• Will self-reliance and a good work ethic now become the cultural norm?
• Will Joe Biden now give more than the past scant offerings of his wealth to charities in our new-bought "share-the-wealth" era?
• Will hurricanes no longer reach the shores of the Southeast coastline?
• Will Obama actually DO something?  (Like in his home Chicago?)
• And what in God's name will moveon.org complain about now?!

We've made the magnificent transition to turn the corner on full achievements of black power. The world is happy. But now you have to be president. Most certainly, you get no relief from the hell of this office you've fought for. And you've promised US quite a bit that we DO expect to receive. Good luck, sir.

I didn't vote.  That is, I "threw away" my vote on a third-party;  Because our vote has to count.  I used my vote to argue that there is a thirst for (and must be) another argument in our "freedom of choice".  I never intend to vote for the "lesser of two evils" again.  That's not choice, that's closer to blackmail.

Look, Obama is a policy nightmare for conservative mentality, but McCain ran a truly crappy campaign.  In the war for branded buzzwords, McCain began to finish every single speech with aggressive pronouncements of "fight, fight, fight".  Fight is a word of struggle;  Compare this to Obama's mantra of "hope and change".  These are words of comfort. So at that level of emotional reverberance, it is "struggle" versus "comfort".  That's a done deal for emotional voters.

But that's just the tip of the crappy iceberg of McCain's campaign.  Personally I rejected his failure to care about illegal immigration, his sorry and pathetic "leadership" with the bailout madness, his rejection of handling issues surrounding the black theology nonsense, and especially his apparent unwillingness to clearly delineate why he makes sense and Obama doesn't; these sorts of issues very much soured my capacity for celebrating his campaign.  I still rooted for the guy, but I didn't feel like voting for him.

On the other hand, the unimpressive senatorial resume of Mr. Obama can easily take a back seat to the significant racial healing of his campaign's success.  I don't feel like voting for this aspect, because it's not really an issue of policy; but I can accept it, and even gladly welcome it.  So, I didn't vote.  And I'm sorry McCain lost, but I'm glad Obama won...

I am currently moving around in Asia.  (I didn't want to be in the US when those promised "McCain wins riots"  broke out, you know). Let me tell you, it's nuts how the world is reacting.  It's nuts.

Of course there is plenty of fantasy, prayer, wishful thinking, hope, and blind trust at work in United States.  In some sense, there has to be.  Furthermore, it is mostly intentional, as a device of campaigning and propaganda.  Additionally, there is desperation, fear, anger; and restitution from a lengthy legacy of inequality for the races.  So on that level alone, Obama had a significant appeal to so many.  So why not, on top of that, add hope or blind trust? Not so bad.

But here in Asia, the ethnic healing is not a real issue.  He's not Asian.  And it isn't even arguably relevant to economics, or foreign-policy, or trade relations, or even US domestic prosperity.  It's simply a domestic racial transition.   

But  I am reading fluffy, mushy love pieces here in Asia that declare the familiar descriptions of fantasy and delusion.  Where does this come from?  Do citizens of other nations really think if they pray for the United States president to be a messiah, that their world will improve?  Will this event move their own government toward domestic flourishing and improve internal human rights policies?  Based on what?  If anything, a prosperous US seems to ultimately generate "appendage"-envy from foreign governments, and radical fanaticism of anti-Western zealots and hard-line sociopaths.

"The new president will create much more space for international cooperation";  Just one of the sentences of many in this vein.  Not "might", but "will".  What is this declaration of fact based on? Obama's Illinois resume? In all likelyhood, the US will no longer participate for some time to come, in the madness that will inevitably flare up in the Middle East, and that is somehow going to play out as a good thing?  That will secure global energy concerns, and consequently market stability?  We'll see, folks.  No one knows, that's for certain!

"Mr. Obama will put more emphasis on Asian policy" another actual declaration of fact about the future; not about possibility, but fact.  Again, based on what?  And furthermore, if there is such emphasis, is it for better or for worse in Asia?  How can Asians possibly know.  Maybe North Korea goes mad, senile and nuclear.  For all  the existing pattern we can analyze, Obama might very well be selling them the weapons.  There is NO precedent at all - who can possibly predict?

My personal prediction; Obama has purchased a disaster.  

First off, there is no longer any room at all for Tim Robbins, Nancy Sheehan, Nancy Pelosi, Moveon.org or any of those types to accuse the right for the evils which plague us.  Everything that isn't fantastic will lie solidly at the feet of the Democrats now.  So the point becomes, are we in store for good times?

Unfortunately, there is still significant global unrest.  There is a great deal of religious conflict, territorial envy, and significant energy struggles with potential future struggles for fundamentals like food and water.  There is global demand and indeed escalating dependency on oil, sourcing from volatile regions.  European and Russian tensions will undoubtedly escalate, with potential to flare up dramatically.  Iran and Israel are still like nitroglycerin.

Immediately, it is a full-blown domestic nightmare.  Band-Aids are being put on terrible behavior and culture, without addressing at all, the infections beneath them.  Personal debt, state-level debt and national debt are soaring beyond ALREADY obscene levels.  Banks are functioning like unstable wolf packs, rather than as civil and long-term business interests.  Failing states and industries are lining up at the Capitol for free money.  Indeed, Washington has just established a surreal pattern of writing reckless checks with more zeros than there were UN resolutions against Sadam Hussein. These checks blindly intend to make the problems and beggars go away (as if they won't be back!)  The illegal immigration is still changing the ethnicity, work environment, relative wage, and predictability and functionality of public budgets.  ("Si Se Puede" actually migrated from its history as the motto of  illegal alien marches to become Obama's "yes we can" victory rally!  This is not a good sign regarding this particular issue.)  And most frighteningly, there is a startling fantasy level of disconnect between what vast social programs cost, how they can be funded, and how necessary they are.  And the American public generally is willing to pretend it isn't so.

Now, I believe many are looking back to the Clinton era and forecasting that a Democrat in the White House is just inherently prone to manifesting a soaring and rosy economy, and likewise general good times.  What absolute nonsense.  Please remember Jimmy Carter.  As for Clinton, he wasn't a brilliant economist; rather, he just happened to be in office when an absolutely enormous, almost limitless and completely brand-new form of super efficient commerce and consumerism appeared. The tools and the technology were themselves a phenomenal industry, even while these same tools created the potential for national and global participation in the biggest known marketplace the world has ever seen.  This technology and Internet boom was the magic carpet which Bill Clinton enjoyed.  What does Obama have?  Is there a brand-new global super marketplace awaiting which we don't foresee?  Perhaps some scientists will invent free energy...(??)...but perhaps such an occurrence would actually destabilize the world to the point where the future is wildly unpredictable.  It might not manifest as a calming thing.

Obama is a healthy transition for America's ethnic journey.  We can all hope he enjoys wisdom, courage and a peaceful run; bringing United States prosperity and calm. But it certainly isn't a given, and perhaps even far-fetched.

Meanwhile, we are all going to be awaiting our health-care; it has been promised.  But this is an absolutely insanely complex entitlement to move quickly on.  Any large-scale changes to this realm will have both positive AND negative impacts, and potential disasters.  Never mind that the money simply hasn't and doesn't exist to pay for it.  Shall we just dump the Social Security program (now in peril) to "secure" our healthcare entitlement promise? 

Will there be a malaise when an enormous disconnect between soaring expectations (as in the well publicized Obama supporter who no longer is going to worry about her mortgage, job or energy bill) and the reality that will become apparent when the glow wears off.

Indeed, the level of global expectation for Obama is our newest bubble.  We have survived the tech, IPO, Stock, housing, and other such bubbles, and now must prepare for the Obama bubble.  Don't get me wrong, I wish him well;  I just don't see where the level of irrational expectation has any chance of fulfillment and consequently is going pay off.

I'm afraid our inability to stop relying on the next BUBBLE is at the heart of our unrelenting instability.

...And God knows why the Asians think it's so great.

After numerous years of pretending to be the nation's crack bulldog/watchdog/hardball-playin' journalistic purist; our hard-hitting analyst of all flawed transgressors has completely tinkled his tingling leg.  He is now the CONFESSED advocate and INSURER of presidential success.

Mathews, do you have any self-respect, or is this all a calculated pitch to crawl up to a staff position in Obama's administration?  I'm afraid you would embarrass the man, and you would definitely cast profound doubt on his administration's judgment. Myself, I will never allow your name to enter a conversation in my company without peels of laughter and ridicule of your infamous impressions of preteen girls backstage at a Jonas brother's concert. 

It is one thing to be biased, it is another to be fully in the tank, but it is yet altogether another level to be on your knees in a puddle of your own self excited puppy pee.  You are no longer simply an embarrassment to journalism, you have become an embarrassment to masculinity.

Moron mothership, time to beam the little boy up.

Obama is not only admittedly interested in redistribution of wealth from one sector of the US to another, but he is also committed to redistribution of wealth from the United States to other countries.

This isn't theoretical, it has already happened.  One of the very few pieces of legislation that they freshman senator is responsible for, is the "Global Poverty Act" (S.2433)" (proposed & sponsored by Barack Obama and rushed through congress by a suspicious VOICE ONLY vote by none other than Joe Biden). The legislation moves to make levels of U.S. foreign aid spending subservient to the dictates of the United Nations, and would push the U.S. to spend 0.7 percent of GNP on foreign aid.

The bill cites the U.N.’s Millennium Development Goal (established by the UN in 2000) as underlying framework, which calls for “the eradication of poverty” by “redistribution (of) wealth and land”. It has among its provisions: a "currency transfer tax," ; a "tax on the rental value of land and natural resources"; "royalty on worldwide fossil energy projection -- oil, natural gas, coal"; "fees for the commercial use of the oceans and fees for airplane use of the skies", fees for use of the electromagnetic spectrum", "fees on foreign exchange transactions", and a "tax on the carbon content of fuels". These would be UN taxes on US buisness and individuals. Add to the taxation tiers of local, state, federal taxes under which you suffer our new UN taxes!

Obama states: “I fully support the Millennium Development Goals.”..."As President, I will make the MDGs [Millennium Development Goals], America’s goals." http://www.unausa.org/site/pp.asp?c=fvKRI8MPJpF&b=3879851

Now charity is close to the heart of most Americans, but why subjugate ourselves to an external governing body to dictate how, when, where, and why we will be charitable?  Will there be oversight and stipulation to prevent the money from ending up in the war chests of despotic leaders and warlords?  Will there be sufficient oversight to prevent the majority of the money from being quietly absorbed by the bureaucracy administering it?  While it is Charity based in language, in fact it is nothing less than mandatory international redistribution of wealth, AT BEST.

Charity by definition is a voluntary act.  For it to actually be Charity, it should be established as a fund to which there are encouragements and incentives for participation (as in clarity, transparency, and monetary efficiency of operations).  Not only is the UN based action established by the bill prone and magnetic to mismanagement and theft, it simply un-American.  The United States voluntarily gives profound and significant aid across the globe every year, but now this act suggests a persistent US OBLIGATION to redistribute US wealth to a foreign agency; who will then decide for us where there are entities deserving our surrendered capital.  Is there any doubt that this global "poverty" fund will find itself routinely participating in political influence? (it is handled by the UN, after all).  Without accountability, this third party globally elite agency can and undoubtedly will practice some level of embezzlement, influence peddling, political meddling, and admitted redistribution of wealth.  The US does not under any circumstance need to OBLIGE itself to suffer law which commits us to hand over our wealth to another non domestic agency with no return of any kind, nor insurance of delivery of this wealth to the intended parties.  What is the point?

Will our money go to help poor Georgians, or poor Russians?  Do we get to say?  Do we get to even know?  Do we get to care why one would be chosen over the other?  No, we would not.

There are other aspects of the bill which are even MORE troubling, though digressions.  Language in the bill flirts dangerously close to committing United States citizens to obey foreign bodies (UN) regarding gun possession. The bill meddles in language suggesting establishment of powers for UN committees over nations for the banning of"small arms and light weapons"  Ideally, this aspect of the laws would be intended to disarm violent insurgents and lawless rebel factions (as if there was any possibility it would work in any way, shape, or form).  But, backed by anti-American sentiment, perhaps it would be molded to demand the US legislation comply with international mandates of prohibition of private arms?  Is anyone able to promise this is not one possible direction of our signed subjugation?

It is bad enough that socialist tenants of redistribution can pervert the framework of American entrepreneurial lifestyle, but Obama has unequivocally proven he is also willing and interested in collecting our wealth and sending it to the UN.  Obama has made his stance clear.  This is practically his ONLY large legislative act in a short Washington career.  If poverty is at the heart of his concerns, why didn't he start in Illinois, and specifically Chicago, at the least, instead of aggressively seeking to redistribute US wealth oversees.  After all, the people of Chicago and Illinois are the ones who gave him his job.  Where do his commitments lay?

I have a nagging suspicion. Is it paranoia? Perhaps you can shed some light on it all for me. Here is my very bad dream...

United States assets, real estate, businesses, stocks and portfolios, cash, bureaucrats and politicians are owned more and more often by overseas interests and investors. It has been a relatively quiet progression (compared to OJ Simpson or the recent lunatic who murdered her baby), but one that continued to advance over the years. At some stage, a tipping point was reached, where the domestic ownership of the country was outweighed by the foreign investment and ownership.

Most immediately, it is recognizable in the absolutely massive US debt. While we frequently advocate the forgiveness of foreign debt to struggling countries, there shall be no such relief or forgiveness for us. We are owned.

But as foreign entities, interests, and owners cannot pass our laws directly, they must pursue every and all means they can discover to lobby, pressure, frighten, intimidate, and manipulate our legislative and election processes. Through campaign funding and other such methods of ownership, they can eventually place favorable or at least friendly key players in key positions of power. In this way, they can maintain legislative control over the interests of the properties and wealth which is now theirs.

The recent 700 billion-dollar bailout (which was trimmed down to 820 billion-?) was a bizarre example of the kind of manipulation which may be afoot.  This bailout was raced through Washington with great haste and infusion of fear. Its goals and methods (and even the dollar figure's rationale) were astonishingly fuzzy and semi-specific. Perhaps this is no accident at all. "Fuzziness" and obscurity may be quite intential. Perhaps it is intended as less of a bailout of Joe and Jane America, than a bailout and security package for compensation of foreign interests -- our owners. Perhaps the bulk of this money will make a quiet little journey overseas, before we even knew to say goodbye.

In this environment, generously funded campaigns will surely swell; which will advocate a move toward a regional "Americas", evolving away from historic sovereignty of United States.  This movement will inevitably continue, toward an international administration of great magnitude, with unprecedented power, authority and financial ownership.  The regulatory power within the banking industries of the world will move toward a never before experienced phenomenon.  Though perhaps paralleling ancient Egypt or ancient Rome, do not look for such a physically localized center of power and wealth; the new kings of global authority and ownership will likely not make it that easy to spot or unmask their identities.  The networks and mazes of financial movement and power acquisition will be outrageously oblique and beyond the grasp of even the experts.  You need not doubt this, the current worldwide packaging and selling of complicated and enigmatic financial "instruments" is nothing short of this; and has occurred to the extent that is considered at the heart of the international monetary crisis presently at hand..

In the end, (or already) the United States interests and concerns will be subjugated to international bodies.  As the International Monetary Fund swells in scope, influence, and power, a parallel GOVERNING body will necessarily need to be empowered, to protect and secure enormous financial concerns.  This kind of money will not circulate without "armed guards".  It is impossible for the already growing IMF to not pursue global governing influence to accompany its monetary assets and maneuvers.  

It is the ultimate "too big to fail" scenario.

Once a certain size and proportion has been achieved, all countries will be obliged to endlessly and perpetually sustain the gigantic hovering banking body from which there is no escape. Inevitably, in a globally centralized monetary/governing system, supreme empowerment will surely lead to supreme corruption.  Insiders and enablers will enjoy celebratory rewards, and contrarian's and agitators will be effectively silenced, made invisible, or perhaps even quietly disappear altogether. Can there be any doubt?

I believe we're more than halfway there, and the current global monetary panics (which are either the result of corruption, delusional stupidity, or perhaps intentionally induced?)  are already generating plenty of space for the realities I fear to be invoked and advanced.  The 700 billion-dollar bailout is a perfect example of the opportunistic taking advantage of panic to seize wealth and power.  This is absolutely indisputable.  To simply be awarded $700 billion ($820 billion) as an unelected authority figure, undefined by the founding fathers of the country, to do with as he sees fit (to address the logic that there is no money in our savings!) is absolutely and inarguably the seizing of real money and real power.  And it happened very fast and with a great deal of threat and fear mongering. In this elevated sense of panic, one could easily suspect there are entities who brought about this bedlam, to create the space in which to seize enormous quantities of devalued assets, authority, and otherwise occupy a momentary power vacuum.

Lastly, isn't it ironic that the same young, zealous, radically-dressed Obama loving youth are the same politically-charged youth who would break shop windows in any city hosting the IMF?  Obama is generally poised with an orientation toward the IMF and global super-administration.  One of the very few legislative actions for which Obama can receive credit during his "experience" (Global Poverty Act {S.2433} ), involved a strengthening of global authority, a degree of submission of United States sovereignty, potential U.S. obligations for gun bans, and U.S. commitment to mandated redistribution of US wealth to other regions of the globe.  I fear this is neither the beginning nor the end of Obama 's global-order disposition...And I fear it may be small potatoes beside that which I don't know about our national political scene, whose actions never cease to defy common sense.

Poor, poor Barak.  He was all excited to go on the largest shopping spree of his life, the likes of which even his $300-earring-friendly wife has never experienced or dreamed. (Well, she probably dreamed it at least).

He was completely ready, and wearing "comfortable shoes"; prepared for a marathon spending spree of cash and credit all over the national mall and the nation's governmental superstores.  He was prepared to even INVENT some stores, for enhanced shopping ability.  In short, he was ready to spend, and spend, and spend.  Nationalized institutions, carbon friendly reward programs, an ambitious 10 year national energy about-face, free health-care for all, free housing for the lazy, free unfettered imigration and welfare for every man woman and pet, free lunches, free backrubs for minorities with sore shoulders...Why, just put the word free before any statement not ending with "for the rich"; he probably considered it.

1. They are perceived and considered to be unimaginative, rather dumb, easily manipulated, and unsophisticated in the resistance to political trickery.

2. They are being taxed into the ground wherever they turn.

DEMOCRATS IN A CIVIL WAR?