Yet, this seems to scare South Korea.  The leadership fails to recognize the ineptness of the Pyongyang PR machine., South Korea’s advantage is that in the realms that matter, there is no comparison. It has things. Technology. An economy. Electricity. The internet. Food.

Yet South Korea inexplicably is afraid of the world’s crappiest public relations team. Seoul has decided that a North Korean Twitter feed (@uriminzok), which only posts links to the North Korea Facebook page, is a threat to national security. It has been deemed illegal and is blocked.

There is a better way to fight back.  And I have the plan of action.

President Lee Myung Bak must build up his own Facebook page through the following steps:

1. Go to the “uriminzok” Facebook page and try to friend all of his friends. He only has about 250. And they seem lonely.
2. Let Kim Jong Il’s wives, mistress and gaggle of teenage lady friends know that he lists himself as “single.”
3. Take a picture of someone throwing up in a garbage bin. Post it. Tag it “uriminzok.” Do you think Kim Jong Il will be able to untag it?
4. Every night at 7PM post a new status saying “I am using our plentiful electricity supply to counteract the darkness.”
5. Continuously post links to this clip from this World Cup.

Censorship is a sign of weakness.

Let me give you an example. Remember when Sarah Palin did a bunch of television interviews? You know, when she couldn’t name a newspaper she reads? What did her people do? They stopped letting her take interviews. But the Obama team would have been thrilled if she had kept talking. Palin had something to hide. So she self-censored.

In this analogy,Obama is Lee Myung Bak. Kim Jong Il is Sarah Palin. (Hey they both use Facebook as their primary PR tool!) I think Joe Biden is Kim Jong-un. Let’s move on.

There is no better propaganda for South Korea than a North Korean Twitter feed. They put out statement like this, from a recent press release on the proposed unification tax:

Speakers at the conference [opposing the tax] blasted Lee Myung Bak for running the whole gamut of such vituperations as “proposal of three-phase unification” through “peaceful community,” “economic community” and “national community” and “unification tax”.

What is the message there? That imperial bastard is pushing his agenda of a “community” based on peace and economic activity! Die!! They don’t do PR well.

So let the North speak through it’s single internet connection. The South should be confident that the Dear Leader’s rhetoric is Seoul’s best propaganda.

Similarly, a cap and trade bill for curbing climate change–an idea that was always presented as being a Republican strategy for successful economic policy when I studied it in high school–seems likely to get signed sometime soon. Meanwhile, the US is slowly pulling out of Iraq. Healthcare, too seems like it will eventually make it through, if perhaps not as the sweeping reform many would like. All of this is good, if slow, movement in the right direction. In short, I believe that history–and I mean near history–will prove President Obama to be prudent, if somewhat cautious; effective, if not always as visionary as one might hope. He is off to a solid start.

But really, the Nobel Peace Prize? What was that for again? His speech in Cairo? It was an important speech that altered the trajectory of US-Middle East relations. But the Nobel Peace Prize? He has been taking the steps in the correct direction, but he does not have an achievement that reaches the level to warrant this.

Certainly he has not achieved what Al Gore did. Who continues to doubt global warming? George Will and Pat Buchanan, as far as I know. Al Gore shifted the debate entirely and made it possible for sweeping change to take place. One could argue that much of the progress that China is making to reverse its previously disastrous policies have stemmed from Al Gore making clear that countries cannot avoid responsibility by casting blame on others. Even if he simply helped push the country, and the US as well, in the right direction, that is a significant achievement.

Let’s look at another promising, but still young career to get a better understanding of why this award is so odd.

There is a good chance that Lebron James will prove to be the best basketball player in the history of the game. But there is a reason he is not yet in the Hall of Fame. For all of his accomplishments to this point in his career, he has not yet proven to be an all-time great. He got close to winning a championship, but didn’t. His been dealt a bad hand in terms of teammates, but has done well with what he has. At times–and even over the course of the last full season–he he demonstrated himself to be an unstoppable force. But as of yet, he has no championships. He has not yet proven himself to be a tremendous force over long periods of time. He’s done pretty well…so far.

Obama’s presidential record perhaps looks like Lebron’s NBA career: both have proven themselves to be exceptionally capable, and with time, they might leave tremendous legacies. But there is much work left to do. Perhaps it was slightly premature to make the case that President Obama has been a driving player for world peace in just nine months.

McCain has made his new campaign strategy an attempt to drive a wedge between women voters who are weary about his agenda and believe in Obama’s platform, but who don’t really like Obama. This is a bit weird to say the least. McCain is now a candidate without a message, and the Palin choice shows that ten times over. His theme is “aren’t you pissed about Hillary?”

The best case for John McCain is that he is an experienced leader in a dangerous world. Up until last week, that was the message, and it was convincing to some. This logic would say that we can’t take a risk on someone with Obama’s experience, or lack thereof. McCain strongly believes this. Or so we thought. He argued it would be extremely dangerous for our country to be led by someone who only has four years of national experience. But does he really believe this?

Sarah Palin, if elected, will have been governor for fewer than two years. Of the smallest state in population in America. Before her 500+ days as governor, she was mayor of Wasilla for eight years and on the city council for another four. If you think that sounds like a decent resume, it might be pointed out, according to the city’s own website, the population of Wasilla is 6,715 (the census says it considerably less, but when your city is under 10,000, who cares?) When Obama launched his campaign she was still mayor of a town with fewer residents than the Yankees have employees.

So, the McCain argument is that the world is a dangerous place, experience matters, Obama is “a nice young man” (but is he ready to lead), but Sarah Palin, three years his junior and with a much thinner resume, is ready to take the reins from the 72 year-old John McCain. Talk about mixed messages. If, God forbid, something should happen to John McCain, Sarah Palin, a woman who 20 months ago was mayor of Wasilla, and since has been the governor of the state with the [4th] smallest population in the union (total population is less than Columbus, Ohio), would be in charge of negotiating with President Putin, President Hu and Hugo Chavez. If a Palin administration would be willing to speak with any world leaders who might not agree with her.

There are of course reasons why McCain picked her. She is an outside the beltway type and self-styled “reformer.” She is very conservative, so he has pleased the hard-right of the party, like Karl Rove, who loved the pick. She is physically attractive, like a John Edwards or Dan Quayle. But most importantly, she is a woman. And here is the real and most obvious reason why he went with a governor that almost no one had heard of 12 hours ago.

This brings us to something stunningly obvious in the two vice presidential picks: Obama chose Biden because he would help him govern, while McCain picked Palin on strictly political grounds. The entire McCain strategy can now be summed up in one sentence: Convince Hillary supporters not to go to Obama. In the most important decision of the election, Obama chose good governance, while McCain went for cynical politics.

No longer can McCain make the already-dubious claim that he is better on foreign policy. No longer can he try to say that experience matters most. His entire campaign is holding the base and peeling off women voters from the Hillary crowd.

Can it work? I doubt it, but you never know. It is hard to imagine that any Hillary supporters who agree with her on the issues would go for a McCain ticket just because there is a woman on it. Palin is strongly anti-choice. She believes in the Bush tax cuts for the rich and opposes universal healthcare. Hell, last week she even said, “I’m not one… who would attribute [global warming] to being man-made.”

In fact, a recent interview with the ultra right-wing website Newsmax.com tells you all you need to know about Governor Palin’s extreme views on virtually everything. Here are some of what she thinks:

On energy: “We have a very pro-development president in President Bush, and yet he failed to push for opening up parts of Alaska to drilling through Congress — and a Republican-controlled Congress, I might add.” That’s right, Bush’s biggest failing is not drilling in Alaska wildlife areas. McCain doesn’t support drilling in the Artic…even now.

“I would push for a strong military and a sound energy policy. I believe that Alaska can help set an example on energy policy.” Drill our way out of it!

On global warming: “A changing environment will affect Alaska more than any other state, because of our location. I’m not one though who would attribute it to being man-made.” Yikes!

On abortion: “I’m pro-life. I’ll do all I can to see every baby is created with a future and potential. The legislature should do all it can to protect human life.” This wasn’t Hillary’s platform, was it?

John McCain has now staked his entire candidacy on the gender issue. He has gone all-in on the notion that he could not win on experience or ideas. Instead he picked someone with 20 months experience running a state with fewer inhabitants than Dayton, Ohio. This was not a pick based on governance, it was based on trying to exploit a perceived Hillary-Obama rift. That it is no way to lead a country.

Jesse Helms, the former North Carolina senator with the courtly manner and mossy drawl who turned his hard-edged conservatism against civil rights, gay rights, foreign aid and modern art, died early Friday.

He made his choice to make his legacy one of hate, and history will remember him appropriately. But instead of dwelling on this mean-spirited person, I’d like to talk about Senator Clair Engle, someone who courageously took a stand that helped pass Civil Rights legislation in the 1960s and has been unfairly forgotten by history.

During the battle to make sure that every American is afforded the right to vote in his or her own country, the Republicans held a filibuster. This meant that civil rights supporters needed 67 of the 100 US Senators to support closing debate, just so the body could vote on the legislation. As proponents struggled to scrap together the votes, Senator Clair Engle of California, a man who had such severe cancer that he could no longer speak, came onto the Senate floor in a wheelchair. When the roll call on ending the filibuster was taken, Engle pointed to his eye, indicating his affirmative vote of “aye.” He was the 67th vote, ensuring that the bill would go to the floor for a vote. It of course passed, and a sad chapter in America’s history of race relations began to close.

I would like to take this opportunity to reflect not on the senator who died last Friday, but instead on the one who died in the spring of 1964 at the age of 52, just one month after the filibuster vote. Senator Clair Engle is a true hero, and history should always remember him fondly.

On Friday, June 13, Tim Russert, the brilliant host of Meet the Press, died at age 58.

Russert’s style revolutionized the political news industry. He patented the tactic of putting a guest’s words on the screen when giving a quote (including the source), leaving no wiggle room for denial or claims of misquotation. Furthermore, he refused to let guests off the hook with vague answers, and worked hard to ensure that guests explained themselves fully..

Yet something else clear about Tim Russert was that he was not simply playing a game of “gotcha.” As a former political staffer for Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Mario Cuomo, he loved the business of politics. He liked the idea of people rising up and fighting it out, both through policy and political tactics.

Tim Russert was a frequent guest on Don Imus’ show, and always gave it out as well as he took it. He was the consummate sport, but never afraid to fight back. From the interviews on Imus I always had the sense that his public personality really represented the true man.

He cared deeply about politics, but he also cared deeply about family. While most political journalists write books about elections, Russert instead wrote one about his father. And then a second. Sadly he died two days before Father’s Day, and the same week that he moved his father into a nursing facility.

Every Sunday morning in high school and college, Tim was part of my family. He introduced political figures to me, and at times made me understand the flaws even of those whom I admired. When I moved back to China at the beginning of last year I was able to listen to Meet the Press on my Ipod every Monday morning on the way to work. It was always disappointing when the hour was over, because I knew I would have to wait another week to hear him again.

Tim Russert was a great journalist on the American political scene, and for some of us, he will never be  replaced.

Former Gov. Mark R. Warner on Saturday removed himself from consideration as a vice presidential running mate for Democrat Barack Obama.

Warner clarified his intentions for the first time as he accepted the Virginia Democratic Convention’s nomination for a U.S. Senate race this fall.

“I have not sought and I will not accept any other opportunity,” Warner told cheering convention delegates.

This is very disappointing.

Starting on the GOP side, there are a few people that are thought to be on the short list. I rank them here in reverse of of strength in my view:

5.Bobby Jindal, Governor of Louisiana. He’s conservative, reasonably charismatic and the base likes him. He was also born in the 1970s. That’s right, he’s 36 (birthday is tomorrow. Happy birthday big boy!). Oh, also, he used to be a Hindu. I don’t think that’s going to help with conservative voters who think Obama is a church-going Muslim.

Since McCain’s best shot is saying things like this, “For a young man with very little experience, [Obama's] done very well,” a guy who has been in the governor’s mansion for just under five months might not be the best choice.

Odds McCain picks him: 5%. Odds they would win: <5%.

4. Kay Bailey Hutchinson, Senator from Texas. She makes some sense in that McCain thinks he can disaffected female Hillary supporters, but otherwise is somewhat illogical. She is middle of the road on abortion, which would no doubt infuriate the GOP base, further reducing turnout. She’s 64, which wouldn’t be a problem if John McCain were a few years younger. But do the Republicans really want to have the average age on the ticket be 68, running against two dems that average about 50? Plus, she doesn’t help with any state. If McCain can’t win Texas without her, he’s in real trouble.

Odds that he picks her: 10%. Odds that ticket could win: slim, unless women get really excited about her, which seems unlikely.

3. Mitt Romney, former governor of Massachusetts. Well, the base actually likes this guy, which is crazy considering how liberal he was until a few months years ago. McCain, however, thinks he’s a slick fraud, and he’s right. The guy can’t remember what position he has from day to day.

On the other hand, he won huge points by bowing out early and profusely praising McCain. He never had the chance that Hillary had to get the nomination, so it was a lot easier for him to take the high road early, but this is the single biggest reason why Mitt could be the VP and Hillary will not be. He’s also considered strong on the economy, a weak point for McCain, to put it politely. Oh, and he’s rich.

Odds McCain picks him: 15%. Odds they would win: 20%.

2. Charlie Crist, governor of Florida. This makes a lot of sense, especially when I discovered he’s more conservative than I thought. I had been under the impression that he was fairly liberal, but he’s not really. People still seem to think he’s not the pick, but he would ensure McCain a Florida victory and he hits the sweet spot in a lot of areas.

He’s 51, which gives him just the right look (his silvery hair gives him a little more gravitas). He’s the popular governor of a big state. And he’s not named Bush (although Jeb jump-started his career). I suspect he’s got the inside track, but again, if McCain has to battle for Florida, he’s got no shot anyway.

Odds McCain picks him: 25%. Odds they would win: 35%

1. Tim Pawlenty, governor of Minnesota. If I were McCain, I would pick Pawlenty. I would also be very old.

Pawlenty comes from the state that has voted Democratic in more consecutive presidential elections than any other, owing to the fact that it is the only one that Mondale won in 1984 (when Bobby Jindal was 13. Couldn’t help myself.) However, it’s never been super-blue, and if there is one state that McCain could potentially pick off, Minnesota is the one. Pawlenty is young (47), but old enough that he doesn’t look ridiculous next to McCain. He has never won more than 47% of the state vote, but the combination of a Minnesota convention and a Minnesotan VP would probably swing the state, something no other candidate can say. Odds McCain picks him: 20%. Odds they could win: 40%.

Dark horse: Joe “the weasel” Lieberman. This guy is such a skunk it makes me ill. Gore’s two biggest blunders were not sending Clinton to campaign in Appalachia, and picking this passionless Benedict Arnold for the VP. I cannot think of a less inspired decision. If McCain picks him, he wins Florida. Old Jews like Lieberman. The great irony is that he couldn’t bring Florida home for Gore.

However, this guy is completely pro-choice, and fairly liberal on some other social issues. As much as I hate Lieberman, he would make things really interesting. I have no idea how this would play out. Would it be the unity ticket? Would the GOP revolt? Would the US invade Iran before or after all of the votes were counted?

He’s also the oldest guy on this list (66), meaning that the odds-on favorite for a McCain-Lieberman bumping sticker would be “Grumpy Old Men.” Odds McCain picks him: 3%. Odds they win: 10%. This would be the ultimate hail-Mary because the right wing would be irate. And the left wing. Come to think of it, this would probably bring on a civil war.

The field. The odds McCain picks someone else would be about 22%. It’s almost impossible to guess these things, so you always have to give the field pretty good odds. Other possible candidates: Jeb Bush (if he had a different last name), Rudy Giuliani (I kid because he’s a border-line fascist), George Pataki, Huckabee (possible. Possibly crazy), Lindsay Graham (makes some sense. In fact this makes some much sense he should be above Bobby “the kid” Jindal, but it’s too late), Matt Blunt (gov, Missouri), Mark Sanford (gov, SC) and Fred Thompson (note to John McCain: Please pick Fred Thompson. Seriously.)

Out of the main contenders, the only two that could cause real problems would be Crist or Pawlenty, and maybe Kay Bailey if she could connect with women voters.

Tomorrow, the Democrats.

Showering at the gym, which is done seated at a low apparatus, there is a hand held shower head, and a hydrant.  This is an inch diameter pipe that sluices water into ‘the splashing bowl’.  Warm, clean, drinkable water flows in quantities suitable for fire suppression and can be left to gush, guilt free, for the duration of a shower and shave.

The locals enjoy bathing and have perfected the art.  There is a practiced nonchalance about the flick of the wrist that sends the contents of the splashing bowl in a clear arc across the shower area, chest or floor.  It is accompanied by a careful look of indifference that seems intended to deny the obvious fact that we are grown men enjoying playing splashy-splashy.

The splashing bowl has a volume of about three litres and is emptied vigorously over the floor, shower area and oneself a minimum of 10 times in any proper shower – and one showers before and after one bathes.  I have long suffered shower guilt.  The water saving lessons of my youth clashing with my simple love of 30 minute showers. Bathing here I feel like a child that has found parentally approved chocolate coated sugar puffs or perhaps a smoker who has discovered healthy cigarettes.  Withdrawal is guaranteed to be swift, sharp and sobering; imposed by my meagre 40 litre electric water heater.

Just today, Senator Clinton has sent a letter to Senator Obama comparing the DNC’s decision not to count Michigan and Florida, which was announced long before the Democrats in both states decided to move up their election dates in violation of Party rules, was akin to the 2000 Florida recount? Really? Then why did she say in January about the Michigan election, “it did not make any difference whether my name was on the ballot, you see, it’s clear, this election they’re having is not going to count for anything.”

Here’s the thing: even if you count Michigan, where Obama’s name wasn’t even on the ballot, and Florida, she still can’t win without changing more rules. So why is she writing letters like the one below at a time when the Party should be coming together? (Stephanopoulos argues she might be angling for VP, but given the things she has said about Obama during the campaign, having her on the ticket would make Republicans’ lives far too easy.) She has certainly earned the right to stay in the race through all of the voting, but has she earned the right to try to tear her Party down? Here’s party of the letter:

One of the foremost principles of our party is that citizens be allowed to vote and that those votes be counted. That principle is not currently being applied to the nearly 2.5 million people who voted in primaries in Florida and Michigan…

I have consistently said that the votes cast in Florida and Michigan in January should be counted [my italics, not hers]…In 2000, the Republicans won an election by successfully opposing a fair counting of votes in Florida. As Democrats, we must reject any proposals that would do the same.

I sincerely feel for Senator Clinton. Even though I don’t like many of her tactics, like advocating the gas tax holiday, which she knows neither has a chance of passing Congress, nor doing any good even if it did, or comparing Obama’s campaign to that of Jesse Jackson’s just after the South Carolina primary, I know that most of the public work she has done has been good. She is on the right side of most issues, and she is, in fact, doing what she thinks is best for the country, as misguided as that is.

Giving up something that you have worked toward your whole life is incredibly hard, and at times painful. It is why athletes stick around long after they have lost their skills. The fact that she believes she is the better candidate only compounds the difficulty. On the other hand, don’t all candidates believe they are the best? That’s why the run after all.

But the thing is that it’s not just that she is trying to count Florida and Michigan when she agreed not to. And it’s not just that even counting those two states she would still be behind. And it’s not just the fact that whereas in Florida hundreds of thousands of people voted for Senator Obama, in Michigan zero did. It’s that she only wants these votes to count so that she can further change the rules of the primary when the 30-member rules committee meets later this month. And that she is publicly calling for super delegates to overturn the will of the voters because that’s in the rules, but can’t accept the decision on the Michigan and Florida primaries even though those are in the rules.

It is at this time, toward the end of a grueling campaign with the finish line in sight, that Senator Obama’s campaign needs to be the most gracious toward a ferocious opponent who likely would have had a similar policy agenda to Senator Obama. And I hope that Team Obama is able to keep its mouth shut in the coming days and weeks and let her leave on her own terms. But Hillary Clinton sure is making it hard to be a gracious winner.