Judging from the current dynamics, America is more prepared for a black president than a lady chief executive. Illinois Sen. Barack Obama enjoys a narrow lead over New York Sen. Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination, but the lead appears difficult for Clinton to surpass. With 10 more states slated to have their own primaries, some party leaders have given up on Hillary, telling her to withdraw from the race to preserve party unity.

Clinton’s response annoys party leaders. Knowing that neither she nor Obama is to get outright the required number of pledged delegates to win and knowing that the so-called superdelegates, or elected party officials, are to decide the nomination later, Clinton’s declaration that she would fight to the end was met with rancor and disappointment.

Obama saved her from embarrassment when he acknowledged Clinton’s right to remain in the race. He could be magnanimous; he leads over Clinton in the number of pledged delegates, popular votes and won states. Opinion polls show him having a two-digit percentage-point lead over Clinton to beat John McCain, the presumptive Republican candidate, in the November polls.

Already, the Democrats appear to have better chances of capturing White House due to the economic recession and the huge Iraq War bill. The current mood is toward isolationism, which calls its leaders to fix the country first before going into another overseas adventure. 

The American experience has two conflicting themes: isolationism and expansionism. It’s isolationist whenever America recoils and goes inward to rebuild and strengthen its own institutions and processes. It’s expansionist (or internationalist) when it goes overseas, ostensibly to spread the gospel of democracy.

After three months of primaries and caucuses in 38 states (Florida and Michigan were earlier stopped from holding theirs for violation of party rules), Obama leads Clinton in a close fight that substantially reduced the latter’s two-digit percentage point. Analysts have credited the Obama campaign for its better organization and clearer objectives.

The Obama campaign is showing its formidable capacity as it continues to raise bigger campaign funds than Clinton’s. This has enabled the Obama campaign to match Clinton’s virtually in every state where the two rivals had met.

Furthermore, it has shown greater resiliency over Clinton’s when it won 12 states after the February 5 “Super Tuesday,”  where the simultaneous primaries and caucuses in 27 states ended in a virtual tie. After February 5, the Clinton campaign did not know what to do, as it has faltered and failed to stop Obama, forcing Clinton to revamp her campaign staff—not once, but twice.

Commentators and party leaders have cited the product—or Obama himself—for inspiring the American public and capturing its imagination. A son of a Kenyan who went to the United States to study, and a white woman from Kansas, Obama, who personifies dynamism and charisma, is an unconventional candidate who has rejected the textbook approach in political campaign.

Obama is a brilliant orator preaching hope to a nation that is suffering from the adverse effects of the Iraq war and recession. Captivating the nation, Obama has built a new party constituency, composed mostly of the youth, African-Americans and educated. Party leaders are hopeful this new political base would allow the Democrats to sustain its future.

In contrast, Clinton has projected the public image of a virago (or fishwife), whose slash-and-burn politics and pugnacity are turning off many party insiders, as she resorts to every means—foul or fair—to win the nomination. Pundits have called her Lady Vordemort or Tonya Harding of US politics. Her base of support has not extended beyond the white blue-collar workers, the elderly and the Catholics.

Behind the façade of her bellicosity is poor politics that borders on the hilarious. Clinton has shown poor political judgment and skills against an opponent described by admirers as “special.” Her political messages seem either clattered or more muddled than Obama’s.

When Obama started to draw huge crowds, Clinton started to belittle his oratorical prowess by saying she was more experienced. But her experience-over-rhetoric message did not seem to sink into the consciousness of the American public as her campaign sorties drew smaller crowds than Obama’s.

Obama made a simple putdown of Clinton’s message when he made the snide remarks that what Clinton did as a first lady was to have tea with the leading dignitaries and “she called it experience.”

Even the Clinton campaign’s TV ad showing a sleeping girl and a phone ringing at 3 a.m. had backfired when the girl, now 18, went public to declare her support for Obama. Incidentally, the film clip was taken nine years ago and the owner advertising firm retrieved it from its files and hastily used it for the TV ad, which was described by the Obama campaign as an act of “fearmongering.”

What further damned the Clinton campaign was her statement that she once arrived in Bosnia amid “sniper fire” in the airport tarmac. Retrieved film clips showed that the “sniper fire” did not exist; she arrived in Bosnia after the war and that she exaggerated her claim to boost her sagging political fortunes.

In contrast, Obama has shown better political skills in handling criticisms, demonstrating a keen understanding that although politics is basically a contact sport, a room for compromise and common ground exists for contending parties.

When the Jeremy Wright controversy had generated nationwide attention, Obama did not wilt and waste time to seize the opportunity to deliver what analysts said was a classic speech on race that could be comparable with the speeches of great American leaders like Abraham Lincoln, John Kennedy and Martin Luther King.

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, a close friend of the Clintons, seemed to have understood Obama’s profound challenge to resolve the racial divide as he abandoned Clinton and endorsed Obama instead. He went to the extent of describing Obama as an “extraordinary character” who would reshape America.

At this point, it appears that destiny is on Obama’s side. Barring any unforeseen event like assassination or a debilitating disease, Obama is on his way to become the Democratic nominee. Given the lukewarm attitude of the Right-wing elements of the Republican Party, McCain, a Republican maverick, may not be able to generate the support of the conservative elements. In this scenario, Obama is given a huge chance to succeed and become the first-ever black president of the United States.

Now, the question: Will an Obama presidency be a boon for the Philippines?

Analysts say Obama may be in a better position to promote world peace. This is because he believes in the use of “soft power” in dealing with other powers in global affairs. He is a strong believer in the power of persuasion, or seeking a common ground amid differences. He is not a purist who dies with pure heart but little accomplishments. But he wants to be a true reformer who has the ability to build coalitions.

But Obama, true to the isolationist tendencies of great American leaders, wants to stop the export of labor. If and when he gains political power, he wants a stop to the current subcontracting of American jobs to Third World countries like the Philippines and India.

In short, while Obama can mend fences and promote world peace, the rising business of outsourcing industry, which the Philippines has nurtured, may suffer a possible slowdown. A policy shift either in the form of heavy taxation for American firms that export labor or tax incentives for those that don’t appears on the horizon. This is something the local BPO industry has to prepare for.

Some 60 kilometers southwest of Hong Kong is the former Portuguese colony of Macau. With a total land area of 28.6 sq km, it is smaller than Mayor Alfredo Lim’s City of Manila, which covers 38.55 sq km. Macau has a population of a little over half a million, less than a third of the Philippine capital city’s official count of 1.5 million people.

‘TWO centuries ago, when a great man appeared, people looked for God’s purpose in him; today we look for his press agent,” the sociologist/historian Daniel Boorstin writes in The Image.

There is at least one similarity that can be gleaned from comparing the country’s current rice problem with the great rice shortage of 1973. In that unforgettable year 35 years ago, the government needed to import huge amounts of rice (and had the money for such imports), but as it happened, it failed to procure the needed rice because of a global scarcity.

Philip M. Lustre Jr.: Will it be Barack or Hillary?

Judging from the current dynamics, America is more prepared for a black president than a lady chief executive. Illinois Sen. Barack Obama enjoys a narrow lead over New York Sen. Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination, but the lead appears difficult for Clinton to surpass.

William Pesek: Greenspan, Macfarlane exposure gap says it all

Like Alan Greenspan, Ian Macfarlane left his central-banking job at a near-perfect moment: just as the good times were ending.

Servant Leader: ‘Spe Salvi’–Part XI

Love and Life

It is not science that redeems man: man is redeemed by love. When someone has the experience of a great love in his life, this is a moment of “redemption” which gives a new meaning to his life. But soon, he will also realize that the love bestowed upon him cannot, by itself, resolve the question of his life.