Rick Santorum attends sermon by evangelical Rev. Dennis Terry

No worry about political correctness at this meeting.. Terry intones: "We don't worship Buddha" So how about American Buddhists? "We don't worship Mohammad". So what about American Muslims? "We don't worship Allah. We worship God." I thought Allah was God the one and only God both in Christianity and Islam. " We worship God's Son Jesus Christ" So what about American Jews?

Rev. Terry goes on about abortion, gay marriage etc. At the end of the evening he prays over Rick Santorum saying: "God, have favor on Rick Santorum." I have included a video of part of Rev. Terry's speech. . No doubt not all old time religion was of this sort. However this type of evangelical exclusionist fervour is no doubt prevalent in parts of the U.S. right now as the Reverend Terry shows us. Terry also thinks that Christians are the key to turning the U.S. economy around. No doubt these are Christian entrepreneurs looking for new markets in China, Malaysia, and India etc.

U.S. elections: Dollars play a decisive role

 An article by Gary Younge in the Guaradian (UK) claims that the dollar plays a decisive role in U.S. politics. Younge starts out by noting that to outsiders many of the Republican candidates have made astonishing statements often supposedly resulting in their losing popularity in the race. The German magazine Der Spiegel Mirror perhaps summed up the view of some foreign observers noting the the campaign seemed to be a parody of the stereotypes that many foreigners have about U.S. politics: . "Those who follow this race daily may have long since lost perspective on how absurd it is,". "Each candidate loves Israel. They all love Ronald Reagan. Each loves his wife, a born first lady, for a number of reasons." Younge should at the least note that it is Republican politics in the primaries for choosing a presidential candidate he is talking about and this does not involve the Democrats. However no doubt part of the description would apply to them as well! But the real decisive element in the campaign is not the debates but cold hard cash.'
    While the role of cash is not new it is made even more decisive by the Supreme Court ruling that allows unlimited spending by PACs. Younge notes that in 2008 168.8 million was spent on the election. Just since voting started less than a month ago Super Pacs alone have spent about 40 million. The trend has been up and up. Election spending doubled between 2004 and 2008.
     Money of course is not the only determinant of success. Santorum won Iowa with expenditure of 74 cents a voter whereas Perry spent a humongous 358 dollars a vote and came in fourth. But as Younge points out in many other situations huge spending on ads seems to be key to campaign results.
   Younge claims the influence of money in elections is corrupting the political culture. The problem is not personal Younge claims but systemic. As Younge puts it:"" it means a group of wealthy people in business will decide which wealthy people in Congress they would like to tell poor people what they can't have because times are hard"  Actually what Younge is pointing out is hardly new. What may be happening is that money is coming to play a larger and larger role. This is hardly a phenomenon confined to the U.S. either. It is no doubt common in all democracies. It is just expensive to run a campaign so that only those who have the support of those with funds can be expected to get very far. There are exceptions but that is the rule. For more see the Guardian article.

Republican candidates for president all favor policies to increase inequality

  Tomorrow in Iowa the first primary to nominate the Republican presidential candidate takes place. Mitt Romney has been picked out as a candidate who represents the proverbial one per cent. But as the chart at the end of the article here shows all of the candidates support policies that favor the one per cent.
    All the candidates favor increasing tax breaks for the rich and for corporations as well. At the other end of the scale they all favor ending Medicare as it is at present. They also want cuts to Social Security to help lower the deficit.
   These policies will increase economic inequality. Cutbacks will decrease demand and no doubt decrease growth. Lack of growth will mean less revenue and a worse debt situation. Of course on other issues the candidates do differ. Ron Paul for example is a thorn in the side of Republican hawks and the Republican establishment generally. Nevertheless they all  opt for policies that will increase inequality.