The front page (as of around 10am this morning) of BBC News Online (UK version) makes for interesting reading today. To begin, the top story is Obama's win in the Iowa caucus. Of course, it also reports that Huckabee has won the caucus for the Republicans, but I don't think anyone cares about this so much, do they? Certainly the Western press I've read (note this is largely constrained to the BBC, the Telegraph, the Guardian and the Economist) seem to have focused their attentions on the battle between Hilary and Obama. And rightly so, it seems. At least this is an interesting battle.

Reading reports though, what strikes me as rather unique is the fact that they're both battling to be the "first" at something - as the BBC report states, "Obama, [who] is vying to become the first black US president". In contrast, Hilary is determined to be the first female US president. Often you'd have a pretty run-of-the-mill candidate against someone who, perhaps, had a separate unique appeal or a separate reason / result that would occur as a result of their win. Think back, even to Blair in 1997. Not only was he going to be the first Labour leader for a good few years of Conservative rule but at 43 he was also to become the youngest prime minister of the 20th Century (Lord Liverpool - 1812 - previously held the title). So, vote for Blair and he trumps a record at the same time as becoming prime minister. In contrast, there was no such achievement to be gained by Major. Another old guy and a few more boring years of Tory rule.

And so with Hilary and Obama they both have something "extra" to achieve, aside from the small insignificant detail of becoming president of the United States. Both are capable of a form of sympathy vote for their cause - even a sense of romanticism. Arguably it would be pretty cool for a woman to become president of the US - ultimate pinnacle for feminism and a long way from the fights held for women to simply be able to vote in elections. At the same time, given the battles to combat racism that have taken place over the past few decades, it would also be pretty momentous for Obama to become the first black president. I doubt Luther King ever thought to dream so far ahead.

Is this what the Democrat nomination will come down to? Hilary and Obama's policies aren't dissimilar - in any event, they shouldn't be since they are going to figurehead the same party and technically should carry largely the same ideals - and whilst they come from different backgrounds and have different experiences, they're pretty equally matched. Is it ultimately a question then, for all those budding Democrats, of whether they want the chance for the first woman to become president or whether they want to give the chance for Obama to become the first black president?

Back to BBC online then. It's worth making a note of the fact that the above, the leader story, even on the UK version of the website is about the American election. American. Not British, American. And ok, so the caucuses / primaries are important in terms of party nomination and "where the race is won or lost", it isn't the election itself. I've just dedicated four paragraphs to it. A sure illustration of the role that America plays in our daily lives.

One of the other top stories is the fact that Darling is going to give more power to the FSA to regulate the banking industry. Now why is it not a surprise that in the entirety of the front page Gordon Broooown is nowhere to be found? We've hardly had a peep out of him for days - clearly it's the Chancellor holding the [purse] strings, so to speak.

Onwards onto the vomiting virus, reported by Ollie here and then the fact that train network is only just beginning to recover from the chaos created by over-running engineering works. The latter is hardly a surprise. Some things are a constant in this life. But the former? Isn't it a little ironic that our hospitals are having to close in preparation for the combat against the double v? For Ollie, I'd suggest he settle down and watch the film Outbreak. Don't worry about an epidemic - it's OK - a hunky scientist with marital problems and an attractive wife will come along soon enough to save the day (and his marriage). Just don't go touching any monkeys. I'm also slightly puzzled by the following statement on the BBC report: "And NHS Direct said calls about vomiting and abdominal pain had been the number two reason for people calling over the Christmas period." If this is number two - and this is affecting a significant percentage of the country - what on earth was number one?

Of course we then have the social responsibility offered by Weatherspoons - adults with children are only allowed two alcoholic drinks in a pub in order to limit their stay. Now ok, this makes sense in a way. Pubs can, by nature of their function in serving alcohol, be full of people who are edging their way towards drunkenness. It's also not exactly pleasant for children to see their parents drunk. Nor are, arguably, parents fully in control of their children's safety when intoxicated - they may be slower to react to dangerous situations / taking care of the child etc. So far, so good. But stop. Those aren't the reasons that Weatherspoons are giving. It's to comply with "child cruelty legislation". Although, hang on, this could, potentially, cover the above. But no, a spokesman for the company said it was "uncomfortable" with children being on the premises for long periods because of a lack of play facilities. Urrr, sorry? Play facilities? Isn't beer mat flicking a suitable game? If that's the reason (and it isn't for the social responsibility reasons advocated above) then why don't Weatherspoons just dedicate a corner of each pub for a children's play area? Or make sure that they have a play area outside? A box of toys aka a doctor's waiting room? That way a) families would continue to go to Weatherspoons pubs and b) Weatherspoons could sell more beer. Bizarre.

That leaves us with Murray getting through to the semi-finals of an obscure tennis tournament. I'm not meaning to lower his achievement, but it says something about the current status of sport in this country when celebrate a Brit getting through to the semi of the Qatar Open. And don't forget that Prince William is now going to train to be a pilot for the RAF.

The final article of note is the latest government initiative to provide free English language classes on migrants to England who have long-term needs. What long-term needs are is baffling. And there I shall stop, I've said enough controversial things for one post. But, can't we teach our own kids English first and only allow migrant workers into the country who can speak English in the first place? Sorry, I'm stopping, honest.
But what a display of news articles which seem to sum up many aspects of our everyday lives today. I'm sure someone out there could analyse it properly.

Clearly I have had too much time on my hands today. The penultimate day of rest and relaxation prior to flying back to Hong Kong tomorrow night for the final nine-week stint. I think I've done all that I set out to do in Blighty - I've seen green fields and blue sky (not to mention Hilarious Sheep Hill), visited friends and family, eaten well (perhaps too well), relaxed and, of course, had my washing done (thanks, Mum). All in all, a fabulous two weeks.