Doves Keep The Faith as Obama Team Tilts Right
Leading opponents of the war have mostly been silent as president-elect Barack Obama, who first built his national image on the foundation of his early opposition to the Iraq war, assembles a group of national security hands that is anything but a team of doves.
It's a disorienting moment for the peace wing of the Democratic Party,
at once elated America selected a new president opposed to the Iraq war
and momentarily disoriented by the imminent removal of a
commander-in-chief whose every action they've opposed for the past
eight years.
"Shock has paralyzed them for the moment," said Steven Clemons, a senior fellow at the New America Foundation who writes The Washington Note, a popular foreign policy blog. "We are in an Obama bubble now. And it's tough to step out and be first to deflate the bubble."
Especially, he added, before that bubble takes shape.
"You've got some people like myself who are saying there may be an interesting design in what Obama is trying to do. Maybe it doesn't fit easily in a neatly sculpted box of liberal pacifist and warmonger hawk. Maybe it's more complex than that."
Still, it's clearly a team that tilts to the right of Democratic foreign policy thought.
Vice-president-elect Joe Biden initially backed the war in Iraq and has supported other military interventions in his long Senate career. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton also supported the Iraq war resolution, a vote that Obama framed as a critical failure of judgement during the primary. She's also taken a harder line on Iran than the president-elect-and is in line to be his Secretary of State.
Jim Jones, a retired Marine General who advised Clinton, Obama and John McCain during the campaign and has refused to disclose his partisan leanings, is slated for National Security Adviser. And running the Pentagon? For at least the first year of his administration, it's virtually certain that the new president will retain Robert Gates-the Secretary of Defense appointed by President Bush.
Liberals scored one victory, though, when a top candidate to take over the CIA withdrew from consideration this week after concerns surfaced over his views on the agency's interrogation methods. In a letter taking his name out of consideration, John Brennan said he didn't want to be a "distraction" to the president-elect.
Yet most leaders on the left are keeping to themselves any criticisms of the centrist quartet that will help shape and implement Obama's foreign policy.
For now there is a measure of trust from liberals who believe Obama will hold to the principles he espoused during the campaign: end the war in Iraq, negotiate with adversaries and restore America's standing in the global community.
"We should have a simple sign on our wall saying, ‘It's the policy stupid,'" said Tom Andrews, the former Maine congressman, riffing off James Carville's 1992 Clinton campaign mantra. "Many will give President-elect Obama the benefit of the doubt about who is executing the policy as long as there is no comprise or backtracking on the policy itself," added Andrews, who now heads the group "Win Without War."
There is, Andrews noted, a reluctance to carp before Obama is even sworn in. "He hasn't been president for one second yet," the former congressman observed.
Progressives who knew Obama before his ascent onto the national stage also suggest that he's remaining on the same course he's always charted - one that hews closer to the middle than those on the right will give him credit for or those on the left would prefer.
Maryiln Katz, a veteran of the peace movement dating back to her days as a member of Students for a Democratic Society, helped organize the October 2002 rally in Chicago's Federal Plaza where Obama declared his opposition to what he called a "dumb war."
But, Katz recalled, the then-state senator also made certain to point out he was no pacifist.
"He asserted his own position in contradiction to [the] anti-war movement," she said. "He wasn't us. He didn't pander to the crowd."
But Katz, a well-connected Chicago public-relations executive, said that some liberals chose to ignore the part of the speech where Obama stressed that he was not against military force and actually urged more aggressive pursuit of al Qaeda.
"A lot of people took his position on Iraq and projected our politics onto him," she said. "And that was never him. It was never true."
Still, President Obama sounds a lot better than President Bush to a peace movement whose members have spent the last seven years in a posted of principled, if often powerless, opposition-and who now have to find a new point of orientation.
"It's a real challenge to those of who have grown up in opposition to everything," said Katz. "How do we behave in a way that it expands the progressive point of view? How do you maintain an independent NGO, issue-based infrastructure based on something other than a culture of complaint?"
Some clues could come in Chicago, where from January 1st to the 19th (MLK Day and the day before Obama's inauguration), a coalition of liberal groups will rally in Hyde Park at what they're calling "Camp Hope" to push for various liberal priorities at home and abroad. Still, the language of their "presence" -- they do not call it a protest-highlights the confusion as to how to relate to an incoming president who is, at the least, less adversarial to their agenda.
The group will congregate daily to "congratulate Senator Obama as our new President-elect and recommit ourselves to progressive actions he promoted on his campaign trail," states the message on their Web site, which adds, "We earnestly hope his presidency will signal the dawning of long-needed progressive change in the United States."
To be sure, there are some voices who haven't hesitated to take on the president-elect when he's departed from their line, but those voices have found themselves increasingly marginalized by the press and those in the peace movement willing to give Obama a chance.
"He is violating the people's mandate," complained Jodie Evans, a Code Pink co-founder who emailed from Tehran, where she was meeting with government officials and other peace activists. "The people elected him over her precisely because of their different foreign policy stances. Here we are in Iran, working to establish citizen diplomacy, hearing the concerns of the Iranian people and how it feels to have [Clinton] say she wants to obliterate Iran. Those comments are not taken lightly and [are] seen as policy positions here."
Evans, who with her husband helped raise money for Obama during the primary and general election, hinted at how the new president-elect has kept the left-wing at bay since winning the election-by focusing on the issue that first brought them to his side.
Recalling her interaction with Obama at fundraisers, the veteran liberal activist said: "It has gotten to the point where he sees me coming and before I am close he just keeps repeating, 'Jodie, I PROMISE, I will end the war, I promise I will end the war.' It is effective in limiting the amount of time I have to complain about what ever is up [to] at the moment."
Those vested in power, though, are less inclined to complain just yet.
"My immediate reaction was that I feel sure that President Obama knows that he was elected on a campaign of change, and that includes on foreign policy," said Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), a Bay Area liberal who co-chairs the House Progressive Caucus, when asked about the new commander-in-chief. "Regardless of who advises him, he must and I believe he will embrace a bold agenda that uses our non-military power,"
Woolsey said others in the peace movement are holding their fire because they are "so relieved that we will have a leader they can trust," even as, she said, they are "counting on the progressives in the Congress to keep his feet to the fire."
So far, though, Obama's yet to feel the flame.
Observed Clemons: "It's very hard for even leaders of the left to poke holes because too many of their followers will say, ‘give the guy a break-he hasn't even been in there yet.' You should see the ridicule or hate at anyone that tries to poke a hole in the Obama myth right now."

Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
108 Comments so far
Show AllWhy reneg on the very very simple promise to reverse the huge tax cut giveaway for the wealthiest? I guess promising and then backsliding after they get what they want is what politicians do.
But nobody should "hope" for them to do the right thing. They have to be forced. Democratic Party politicians (and Republicans) at all levels should be voted out for not...
1. Ending the military adventures in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. and returning the troops and the savings back home.
2. Transferring some of the tax revenue back to those who actually paid it and earned it.
Legislators, mayors and governors need to demand a return of $$$ to the needs of their constituents. It will not do to whine about poverty and cut schools and public transportation, for instance. They have to stand up for us. If enough of them are threatened with independent candidates and non-election, they might run panicking and force the prez to honor his promises. Congress perhaps too, although few of them stand for much.
Joe
Bring America Back !!!! Well, Mr Martin is real on point===we progressives
are contently passing time, as we watch Karl Rove and Rush Limbaugh on
FOX TV praising Pres Elect Obama for the Cabinet Appointments he has already
announced !!
***So it is not easy to see the belly laughs, the happiness, the smiles,
the unabated pleasures of Limbaugh and Rove, knowing what we have
known about them for 8 long years. They are just elated with Robert Gates
and with Hillary Clinton (darling of Rupert Murdoch) and they make no bones
expressing their elation on National News.
***But wait a minute, if these Neocon war criminals are happy, what is
that telling us about the forthcoming Administration, even before we
get to the Big Dances and Inaugural Balls ??????
There they are, Rove and Limbaugh, cajoling, praising, openly acknowledging
their imminent satisfaction, patting Barak on the back, stroking his Ego !
Guess we potted plants lefties can't even remember Kucinich at the
convention screaming at the top of his voice==WAKE UP AMERICA !!!
it is so good to see the previous poster hit obama. cool. i learned on cd to HATE this person. i thank you all. nice to partake in yer hatefest. love, someone you will never know.
.Why continue to conflate hate with honest criticism? I'm sure you have your reasons.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
As things are, there was no chance for a third party candidate to win. The very survival of the US is so precarious that we did, indeed, have to vote for the "lesser of the evils", and realistically, there were only two viable candidates. Obama kept his campaign message "pleasingly" vague, letting people interpret his words however they wished. He took care not to anger the rich and powerful, told the middle class what it wanted to hear, and remained oblivious to the suffering of our poor. The bottom line remained that America had a choice of voting for McCain, to remain on the path we're on today, or Obama, in hopes that there might be enough change to get us out of these terrible times.
Obama did "mislead" the voters. For example, early in the campaign, he strongly insisted that he rejected "trickle down economics". So what is his social policy agenda? Yep, trickle down economics: Increase the wealth of the rich, and this money will be used for the benefit of the middle. "Been there, done that," and it has failed miserably.
We picked the lesser of the evils. If we want change, the people, We the Ordinary, will have to organize and demand it, forcefully if necessary. And I don't think Americans today have what it takes to do that.
Your analysis is astute. "We the Ordinary, will have to organize and demand it, forcefully if necessary. And I don't think Americans today have what it takes to do that."
Then we will have to change. Yes we can.
Joe
If the election were held before November 1, 2008, I would have voted Nader but having watched even supposed Nader/Mckinney supporters drop off like crazy in my neighborhood, I gave up and voted Obama relunctantly even when I knew I sadly voted against my own heart and mind. However, at this point, since it would have made no difference anyway given that Congress and the Courts haven't changed much and since Obama's leading Mccain by 68 million to 59 million, I pretty much treat Nader's loss as sour grapes. I put up with the last 8 years so I don't think the next 4 could be any worse but we'll see.
.I have a dream...Ok that was someone else. What if we held an election wherein everyone voted for that candidate who best represented their own wishes for this nations course? Instead you imply that you voted for someone who could win, when that candidate represented you not at all. Is that any way to achieve ones goals?
My neighbor on the one side voted for Obama, my neighbor on the other for McCain, neither influenced my vote nor I their own.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
"....governs with integrity...."
What does that even mean ? There is no integrity but outrage at this stage in the game, it's too late to play russian roulette someone needs to take away the gun !
Re: Barak Obama: Has 'Little Bo-Peep has lost one of her progressive sheep?'
Up to his keister in reichwing warmongers and wall-to-wall in equally warmongering Zionist Jews in his administraton - This man Obama is more like Houdini in manacles and leg irons trying to escape from the hanging wooden box 3 meters underwater.
But, the real problem is Pelosi pushing to allow the Bush crime syndicate principals (Cheney, Feith, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Wurmser, Abrams. Negroponte and Perle) to escape unscath from prosecution for all of their war crimes; including, but not limited to torture, rendition, extra-judicial assassinations and attacks on countries the US is even not even at war with (Syria, Somalia, Ecuador, et. al.) and the (((stomping))) on the US Constitution they (and the Bushwacker for a fact) had sworn to defend over the past 8 years.
TheAZCowBoy
Tombstone, AZ,
Okay progressives, lets cut to the chase: compared to Bush and Cheney, Obama is the paradigm of virtue and while you cannot expect him to be perfect,to opprobriate him before he is even in office, is a persiflage.President elect Obama has a very difficult job and as long as he governs with integrity, I can forgive his mistakes.Constructive criticism yes,but give the poor guy a chance.
Raising the specter of perfection in order to silence criticism is an old rhetorical maneuver: apparently, though, you need to be reminded that there is something between perfection and total betrayal of one's promises as a candidate for highest office.
well said sir.
This post conjures up the vision of the original Paul Revere riding from old Boston to Lexington, crying out to the people that they really ought to give King George a chance, before jumping to any hasty conclusions about him.
By the way, "...to opprobriate him before he is even in office, is a persiflage"??? What is this, Thesaurus Day? There isn't even any such word as "opprobriate." And you don't really mean "persiflage." Jesus H Christ, use the dictionary.
"...President elect Obama has a very difficult job and as long as he governs with integrity, I can forgive his mistakes.Constructive criticism yes,but give the poor guy a chance"
- Attitudes like this express the impotence & chronic confusion of liberals. The guy just picked a cabinet full of war hawks, shills for Wall St, and Republicans. It's already too late for him to "govern with integrity." He's already betrayed the people who voted for him. If Bush had been selected for a 3rd term, his cabinet wouldn't be much different. The new Treas Sec used to work for Kissinger Associates, for crying out loud.
Chill out Dave B.I voted third party and this post was suppose to be satire! I actually agree with you. Next time please do not jump to impetuous, conclusions, thanks.
Well what I think you all want is a dictatorship, with a progressive leader of course. Because no one person, Right, Left, Center or whatever could do anything.
Nader with all he greatness and wonderful idea's would not be able to accomplish a damn thing with out the help of hundreds of other members of the white house.
This just silly talk. "Oh no Obama is going to the right", "I really wish Obama would just rip down the MIC, do something about Israel, give us all healthcare.
Yeah that would be great, but since there is no person on the planet that could do any of these things by him or herself I think it's a bunch of crap what you are all saying.
Bush is a horrible president, but he didn't do 8 years of damage by him self. So don't expect Obama, Nader, Kucinich, McKinney, or President-Elect ABC 123. Do carry a magic wand that can fix all the problems.
Sure, it's fair to be angry about choices, his policies, and what not. But stop acting like he is the ruler and controller of the land. He Good or Bad, right or wrong, can not act alone.
There is much more wrong than not having a Progressive President. Please try and see past that.
Of course he wont do it by himself, he has a congress full of Republicans, Blue Dogs and New Dems to carry his water. Does anyone think Harry Reid wants to pass liberal legislation?
Exactly my point. So if he doesn't live up to our dream "President". Maybe we should work a little hard to get more than 10/535 progressives into congress.
I don't like Obama either damn, give the guy at least 5 mins to be president before we all start crying. I'm sure Progressives would have been even happier if McCain would have won.
And as far as third parties go. Please stop being so angry at people for voting for the lesser of 2 evils. Until we have a media that gives attention to third parties, and a whole list of other things. It's going to be hard to not make people vote third party when they fear the greater of the 2 evils might get into office. Sometimes principle just isn't enough. Principles won't feed my child. And principles won't keep children around the world safe.
Why the surprise? The same kind of crooks are still going to be in power even all the Clinton retreads. The guy is a politician. Enuff said.
let's call for ralph nader to head the environmental protection agency *and* the federal trade commission !
I know a little fellow, his name I think is Jo,
But he is seldom called by that--he has a queer nick-name,
Wherever he goes the children cry, "There comes 'I-told-you-so.'"
For that is what he always says in playing any game,
"I told you so! I told you so!
You see I was right when I told you so."
He is not more than twelve at most and, yet, to hear him brag,
You would believe him forty-five, so much he seems to know.
Whatever the sport or fun may be, if marbles, ball or tag,
You hear his shrill young voice ring out "There, now, I told you so.
I told you so, I told you so,
You see I was right, for I told you so."
He thinks the children most unkind when they refuse to play,
Or when they hide their plans from him and do not let him know!
He never thinks how hard it is to hear day after day
That aggravating cry of his, "There now, I told you so.
I told you so, I told you so,
You see I was right, for I told you so."
The boy is bright and smart enough, and might be loved by all,
If he could learn one truth which not all grown up people know.
That truth is this: in life's great game, no matter what befall,
The nobler nature never cries, "There now, I told you so.
I told you so, I told you so,"
'Tis the cry of the braggart, I told you so.
The Beautiful Land of Nod by Ella Wheeler Wilcox
"All Nature's difference keeps all Nature's peace." Alexander Pope
Terms of Right/Left ideologies are one dimensional, defining only an 'x' axis of method that harbors an inherent fallacy.
Lacking is some sort of descriptive component indicating commitment within economic strata, a 'y' axis, if you will. Applying a Top/Bottom metric towards the policies of the emerging Obama administration would indicate positions very much skewed towards the top and nowhere near the center of economic interests for the majority of American people.
Hence, the concept of Obama centrism is nothing more than a canard.
judging from so many of these comments, people here who did not vote for him somehow expect him to walk on water anyway.
how strange.
http://LMV.hu/redjade
Not quite right: for me it is not my expectations that are at stake (I had none), but rather Obama's discourse and promises during the campaign, and, more broadly, the political process at the federal or national level and its inherent corruption.
I know a lot about "hope" and I'm very suspicious of it. I was in an abusive relationship, for over 15 years, and hope was the elusive carrot that kept me there. Life was always on the verge of "getting better" (but never did). Meanwhile the stress almost killed me. There
was always some "complex" reason that I couldn't fathom (father, president, your "man" knows best) but if I just hoped and trusted.....
Stick a fork in me, I'm done ! Say what you mean, mean what you say, anyone who doesn't do this doesn't get my attention, nor my vote. The time for God, Santa, Parent or President to give us presents we hoping for is over.
From the get go:
It isn't just the "peace wing of the Democratic Party" but the majority of Americans who oppose the disaster of Iraq. But since the article already uses the framing that marginalizes popular opinion as some fringe interest, is it any wonder that it also echoes the perception that people are holding their fire, when plenty of people have expressed more than passing disappointment? People wanted to believe that Obama posed as a centrist to play to a wider audience but it turns out he posed more as a progressive to appeal to the people, then pivoted to powwowing with the power brokers even before the ink was dry. The people were played based on hope and change.
Seems like an accurate assessment.
Karl Rove has just endorsed Obama's appointments.
Could one imagine a more fitting kiss of death, delivered after David Brooks's (the conservative commentator of the New York Times) and Joe Liberman's love bites?
Obama has already massively betrayed his pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright. As such, don't you think he has it in him to turn his coat on a good part of his electorate?
Is 'keeping faith' a euphemism for keeping blind faith, or, worse, self-deception and denial?
Wake up, faithful flock, and smell the coffee of demagogy!
it is sooooo good on cd to see you all dessecrate obama`1 can i get a witness. arizona
'to desecrate' (one 's', by the by) means 'to violate the sanctity of'.
I didn't know Obama was a sacred cow. I thought that Common Dreams was a democratic forum of debaters, not a religious institution, and that criticism and critique, dissent, and, yes, even conflictual, controversial voices are an intrinsic part of a democratic public forum.
.Don't be silly. CD, like so many political forums, consists of those whose opinions are writ large and in gold leaf, and to violate one by disagreeing, however polite ones method, is to court an angry screed.
But some of us , me especially, love to puncture balloons far too much.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Is that a self-sillying prophecy?
.Sure it is, in part. I do not exempt myself from the critique I posted. We must all recognize our flaws and foibles if we hope to move forward.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
I don't find anything about Obama's appointments to be surprising. I didn't vote for him because I anticipated exactly what he's been doing so far. If one listened to what he said instead of indulging in the mantra "change," it was clear that his economy heart was with the capitalism of finance and his foreign policy heart was with the Likud. He openly talked about keeping "noncombat" troops in Iraq and widening the war in Afghanistan. Only silly folk can express surprise now.
I think that Obama has been very deceitful in terms of what he will actually do when elected. Hilary Clinton and former Bill Clinton aides do not equal change. I suppose they are marginally better than Bush's aides but who's to say if they really are in this day and age. I think people looking for a quick end to the war in Iraq will be sorely disappointed. I also think that unless all the new democrats elected to congress and the senate are more liberal then their new colleagues, and have more of a backbone, then the Republicans will still actually hold a lot of sway.
In any case, hope is a good thing for people but if you build yourself up to much, it can also work against you if you don't deliver. The office of President is not the end all, be all of politics as much as they make it seem.
I think that Obama has been very deceitful in terms of what he will actually do when elected. Hilary Clinton and former Bill Clinton aides do not equal change. I suppose they are marginally better than Bush's aides but who's to say if they really are in this day and age. I think people looking for a quick end to the war in Iraq will be sorely disappointed. I also think that unless all the new democrats elected to congress and the senate are more liberal then their new colleagues, and have more of a backbone, then the Republicans will still actually hold a lot of sway.
In any case, hope is a good thing for people but if you build yourself up to much, it can also work against you if you don't deliver. The office of President is not the end all, be all of politics as much as they make it seem.
As I have written many times in the comments section since early last year: Obama is not a progressive, he did not run as one and he is not going to govern as one.
Based on his choices so far, McCain really won the election.
Barack Obama was for single payer before he came out against it.
obama says he will provide "change" and that he needs a mass movement to push him: summers did not get treasury and brennan did not get the cia; both faced strong and loud progressive opposition and it worked! progressives should make concrete requests of change, have obama declare them "change" or "no change", and compel him to offer alternatives whenever he declines a request. when obama will embrace a reform publicly the team won't matter because it'd be up to progressives to make sure that the team executes things fine, that any bluffs are called out, and that team members who sabotage things are exposed. post-election spectator-sports habits won't cut it anymore, folks. good obama or bad obama and good team or bad team, progressives will have to be vigilant and loudly --if smartly-- assertive. as for concrete things to ask for right now: i) creation of a federal bank that will hire laid-off experts in identifying needed production and use it to inject credit in actual production and so bypass the banks of the rentier class that are sitting on bailout moneys waiting for a good moment to give the money to their investors (they risked, they lost, so let's use the money to jumpstart the financing of real production directly); and ii) stop the subsidies to fat-cat farmers but redirect a big part towards small farmers (this would win obama the rural states!). above all be assured that if obama dared to appoint any non-main-stream people, blackwater inc. would take him out in a breeze well before inauguration, so be happy that the center right is so delighted right now and think twice of what you are asking for. [and yet if progressives campaigned for ralph nader as secretary of the interior it would be fine even with militia types].
"post-election spectator-sports habits won't cut it anymore"
-Best comment on this thread.
Cheering, booing and arguing whether team O is from heaven or hell is for losers.
We have a powerful netroots, MSNBC, a shifting MSM and an electoral mandate for change.
Organise or constructively comment.
Do you think either Wall St. funded part is actually going to listen to the American people? And yes I voted for Obama because Sarah "Moosolini" Palin scared the crap out of me, but I certainly voted for Obama with both eyes open, not with some nebulous "hope" he was going to bring substantive "change."
Poor Obama, he has fifty years of American warmongering to deal with along with the Christian Crazies, the Deranged Capitalists, the Israeli Imperialists, the Right-wing Rodents, the Extreme Nationalists, the American Exceptionalists, the Gun-toting, Racist rednecks, the Incestuous Political Dynasties, etc.
I pity him. God himself, if he existed (which he doesn't) couldn't sort out that mess!
You want a different slant on Mumbai? Do you have a brain that works? Check out:
www.dangerouscreation.com
Yeah, I have a brain that works. Do you, DavidG. "Gun-toting, Racist rednecks".. Wow, that remark wasn't a bit racist was it? How about disarming racist liberals? Poor Obama! How dare anyone speak the truth about Obama. Pssst... here's a secret, he's a fraud. He's no different than any run-of-the-mill neocon Republicrat.
Yes, it appears that we are getting change. Change from the promises made during the primary and now change from the promises Obama made during the campaign. First, he promised to only accept public campaign finances, he reneged on that. Then he promised not to vote for FISA immunity for telecoms - he reneged on that promise. If you had a friend who made promises to you like that and then changed on you - what would you think of the friend?
Of course, he is an american leader. So much for truth and integrity.
It is becoming more clear that the US is very much a one party government based on many of the most basic financial issues. We really never have change to vote for.
Thanks for your comments, xyz, but we did have real change to vote for. His name was Ron Paul. When he said to get the troops out of Iraq immediately, he meant it, and he would have. Unfortunately the power elite would never have let him be president.
Nope it was DENNIS KUCINICH!
BillofRights
Nope, it was both but neither of them won, PERIOD !
There's always room for hope-- otherwise, what's the point in fighting for anything. You have to be able to envision the dream if you ever plan on getting there. If not for hope, then we might as well just throw up our hands. I am not willing to do that-- at the very least for the sake of my own conscience. That being said-- I do feel pretty powerless when I look at the present state of the world.
I don't think putting your faith in one person is healthy no matter what their agenda or promise. So, while I am still hoping that Obama will not be a total disaster, I will not be shocked if he is.
Perhaps a total collapse of the US will serve as a catalyst of some sort. I kind of believe that for things to get better, they will have to get worse. That is not to say that I rejoice at the thought of more war and violence, people losing their jobs and homes or not being able to put food on the table. But my hope, is that at some point people will say enough is enough and start to focus on tangible change on a local front.
Many great posts. I believe Obama has jolted the American imagination, this is the great dynamic for social change. Until now, the American imagination has been imprisoned in the mind set and propaganda of corporate capitalism.
hope unfortunately is the worst dope. expectation is less self deceiving, shows better judgment, which is always imperfect in matters such as these.
does anyone seriously believe that Obama would not have voted for the Iraq war had he been in the Senate at the time. Every vote that he took to finance the war once he was in the Senate indicates that he would have.
Obama's election signifies the electorate 's fairly overwhelming disgust with the Bush presidency; the economic catastrophe that Reagonomics as then amplified by Rubin and Co. brought not just to this country but to the entire world... if you think about it: do you really want these people, who call themselves "pragmatists" or "realist," to fix the very problem they created, when something truly radical is needed? same goes for keeping Gates whose roots go back to the creation of the Mujahedeem under Brzezinski in the later 70s. And we know what that "genji" has brought the world and that Mr. Brzezinski who is Obama's chief foreign policy adviser continues to be proud of "destabilizing" a country of 25 million: for the sake of what mad ideology?
Obama is the same old same old just with a nicer head.
Hillary was right, he made a darn good speech in '04! Good enough for most, I guess.
Hope is the life blood of democracy, even a dying democracy. Democracy is the only hope for the whole world.
CommonDreams readers, this is your chance, keep your eyes on Camp Hope in Hyde Park, Chicago (http://camphope2009.org/) and find a way to participate.
Knowing some of its' brazen hard core activists, it may be just the beginning. It just may lead to an Obama "FDR moment" and if not, then millions of Americans in the streets. It is the only message the rich 1% fear and it can succeed. We must believe that.
Stephen, there should've been millions in the streets during the reign of Mad King George but there weren't!
What makes you think that apathetic Americans can change?
www.dangerouscreation.com
Our soup kitchens and food banks are now running out of food. Wait till it really hits the middle class. Such a movement starts in the belly.
Wow DavidG, impressive website.
The 8 trillion dollar bailout is Grover Norquists' wet dream, not only is a large of amount of tax payer money transfered to the corporate ownership class from the government, but it leaves little left over for social programs or building infrastructure. :(
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2008/11/bailout-pledges-hit-77-trillion.html
It's Bush's one last gift to the crony capitalists before Obama takes over and sadly Obama seem to be going along with that program 100%. I guess it's not surprising considering Obama got even more Wall St. funding than McCain, but it is disappointing to me after switching my vote from McKinney to Obama.
Interesting site hoot. Where does all that money come from? 4.4 trillion from the FED, what do they do just print it up? 1.5 trillion from FDIC, 1.1 trillion from Treasury. I can barely get my head around a billion, but a trillion? How many zero's is that? According to Stieglitz the Iraq war alone has cost 3 trillion. With equity in real estate collapsing, state's are struggling to pay their bills. Consumers are in debt. Where does 8 trillion dollars come from?
Probably printed it right here in my hometown, Philly.
BillofRights
Rebel, I heard something about "treasury bonds" somewhere but I don't know if that's correct. I do think the long tern effect is one of three possible things:
1. The debt is left unpaid except for the interest leaving less money for social programs and helping the environment with infrastructure research, high speed rail, buying park land, etc. Winner the bankster crony capitalist class as they get more interest moneyin their pocket from tax payers and we get fewer services in return for paying taxes.
2. The government goes broke leaving no regulation of corporations in terms of workers rights, trade or the environment, winner the corny capitalist bankster class.
3. They run the printing money presses leading to hyper inflation and depression and the baknsters and large land owners buy up poor and middle classes peoples asset during the ensuing depression. They then resell them IF th economy rebounds, otherwise they hang onto them becmong even more feudal lord like, thus winning both on he up and down. Winner the crony capitalist bankster class.
4. We say enough is enough, forgive poor and middle class debt in a sort of jubilee, regulate the financier class, and nationalize failing banks and industries to benefit all people, for example having the auto companies produce busses, trains and wind mills. Chavez and Evo Morales are trying something like this, winner the long suffering poor and middle class.
99.99% we get on of the first 3 options IMO, .01% chance we get option 4. IMO the left needs to start learning economics again as was common among leftists in the 19th and early 20th century. Without and overarching socioeconomic ecological systems view of what's going off we dissolve into a hundred little interest groups like, women, gays, latinos, environmentalists and thus divided we are easily picked off. Although things like feminism were started with the best intention of empowering women as was black power etc, in the long run interest groups politics has weakened the left tremendously IMO. Sitting in an encounter group and talking about our personal histories my feel "empowering" but you can be sure while that is going on the globalists are laughing their way to the quite literal bank.
busterkikki
I feel for you "turkeys" ( this IS Thanksgiving isn't it?) who show strong fears about Obama, giving up on him before he can even take over the Oval Office. The People elected this man on his terms, with great hope. In my opinion he has not failed anyone to this point, which will surely disappoint some you annointed ones who know all the answers but not really very many of the questions.
Obama has been elected. He takes the Presidency in January. Why don't we give him a fair and reasonable chance to perform before we enscribe lofty thoughts about how he has already failed? He wants and needs our support. So, let's give to him.
Plenty of time to criticize and make profound pronouncements after his inauguration and some months thereafter.
.He was elected on his words not his terms, and his words changed rather importantly as the campaign unwound. One must understand that a rather large portion of the nations electorate voted for other than Barack Obama so these folks are not very happy right this minute.
I must state that your remarks are far from conciliatory and even further from any rational attempt to bring folks together. Folks who criticize the dichotomies of the Barack Obama campaign or his appointments, which dramatically illustrate his rightward leaning and his obeisance to both Wall Street and the Military Industrial folks who perpetuate war because it is good for business, are by no means deserving of your snide and rather silly words. You really betray yourself in fact with such as those, "annointed ones" indeed, what portion of dissent do you allow in your narrow little world?
It is far, far easier to turn a ship from its course as it leaves the dock than it is to alter that course once it has built up a full head of steam. It is never time to cease criticism as long as it is honestly intended and rationally delivered, something you yourself may be incapable of understanding or achieving.
.
We see things, not as they are, but as we are.
Anais Nin
Hi b. it is imperate for those who worship the unattainable to desecrate that which is. thus the miniscule imputus for their sadnesses. a function of voids. arizona.
busterkikki
Hi, Azjoe. If you were referring to me when you said hello to Mr. B., I would ask you to interpret for me what you said. It sounded good, but not intelligible. Hoping to hear from you!
busterkikki
Hi, Azjoe! I am a former Phoenix resident who had to give it up after watching the city self-destruct over 40 years. You should have seen it 50 years ago. Great!!
I'm living in Iowa now, and in the part we live we have a super abundance of Republicans, which I used to be for forty years (my wife worked for Barry Goldwater), but I don't understand why people continue to harass Obama in such destructive ways. Our local paper had a letter to the editor bemoaning the fact that Obama hadn't made the changes he promised. Well, duh, he doesn't take office until January.
I think many people are tired and some bitter after a long dog-fight that never addressed some of the real issues we wanted to hear about. But since Obama has been elected, I believe we should give him a fair chance to live up to his promises. If he does, great. If he doesn't, than the disappointment will be widespread and he will deserve all the hiss-boos that he hears coming his way. Until then.......?
Reasonable post.
Hope (or denial) springs eternal.
"... Maybe it doesn't fit easily in a neatly sculpted box of liberal pacifist and warmonger hawk. Maybe it's more complex than that..."
- Oh yeah, it's "more complex than that," all right. He's not a liberal pacifist in any way, shape or form. He wholeheartedly supports the "War on Terror," the quintessential expression of the US's presumed "right" to use military force anywhere in the world, anytime it believes it's in its interests to do so.
The so-called "complexity" enters in, only because so many naive voters actually bought into the idea that Obama was "really" a "liberal pacifist," and was just "pretending" to be a hawk, to get elected. Surprise, surprise. Now we see him selecting the same Pentagon chief that Bush selected, while supporting the same Wall St bailout policy that both McCain & Bush supported. There's "change you can believe in," all right.
I supported him because he was better and smarter than McCain...
If the Russians try to take back Alaska, Palin will win the next election and I don't think that will make them happy..
But seriously, it is about the Feds War economy based on Debt that has failed and The Left and the Right are beginning to see the light... learning to add is our real hope. War is expensive and the USA is broke...not much of a future for War profiteers in America.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20081201/klein
If you think things are crazy now, Keep your seat.
Maybe you could use a little more information to help you understand those appointed by President-Elect Obama.......I have been reading about Club Bilderberg for years, go to the list of invitees to the 2008 Bilderberg Club Meeting (I found it in an American Free Press Site), you will find some interesting names that attended.
I look at my hands and I see nothing.....but, I, like many people, have "Hope" that he will bring change and that is in my heart.....I will listen to his innaugural address.....
You would think 1,2 million Iraqis Dead is enough........You would think that over 4 million Iraqi refugees is enough.....You would think that over 4,000 American soldiers dead is enough. You would think that over 3 trillion dollars spent invading and occupying another country is enough(Don´t forget Donald Rumsfeld said in a press conference in 2002, "The Department of Defense can not account for over 2.3 trillion dollars worth of expenditures.")
You would think that the transfer of funds from the U.S Treasury to Wall Street to the tune of possibly 2 trillion dollars is enough.(Huffington Post thinks it will go to 7.8 trillion dollars)
All we have is "HOPE".
If Obama dosen't work out for us then there is always Plan B!
--------------------------------------------------------------
Russian analyst predicts decline and breakup of U.S.
19:31 | 24/ 11/ 2008
MOSCOW, November 24 (RIA Novosti) - A leading Russian political analyst has said the economic turmoil in the United States has confirmed his long-held view that the country is heading for collapse, and will divide into separate parts.
Professor Igor Panarin said in an interview with the respected daily Izvestia published on Monday: "The dollar is not secured by anything. The country's foreign debt has grown like an avalanche, even though in the early 1980s there was no debt. By 1998, when I first made my prediction, it had exceeded $2 trillion. Now it is more than 11 trillion. This is a pyramid that can only collapse."
The paper said Panarin's dire predictions for the U.S. economy, initially made at an international conference in Australia 10 years ago at a time when the economy appeared strong, have been given more credence by this year's events.
When asked when the U.S. economy would collapse, Panarin said: "It is already collapsing. Due to the financial crisis, three of the largest and oldest five banks on Wall Street have already ceased to exist, and two are barely surviving. Their losses are the biggest in history. Now what we will see is a change in the regulatory system on a global financial scale: America will no longer be the world's financial regulator."
When asked who would replace the U.S. in regulating world markets, he said: "Two countries could assume this role: China, with its vast reserves, and Russia, which could play the role of a regulator in Eurasia."
Asked why he expected the U.S. to break up into separate parts, he said: "A whole range of reasons. Firstly, the financial problems in the U.S. will get worse. Millions of citizens there have lost their savings. Prices and unemployment are on the rise. General Motors and Ford are on the verge of collapse, and this means that whole cities will be left without work. Governors are already insistently demanding money from the federal center. Dissatisfaction is growing, and at the moment it is only being held back by the elections and the hope that Obama can work miracles. But by spring, it will be clear that there are no miracles."
He also cited the "vulnerable political setup", "lack of unified national laws", and "divisions among the elite, which have become clear in these crisis conditions."
He predicted that the U.S. will break up into six parts - the Pacific coast, with its growing Chinese population; the South, with its Hispanics; Texas, where independence movements are on the rise; the Atlantic coast, with its distinct and separate mentality; five of the poorer central states with their large Native American populations; and the northern states, where the influence from Canada is strong.
He even suggested that "we could claim Alaska - it was only granted on lease, after all."
On the fate of the U.S. dollar, he said: "In 2006 a secret agreement was reached between Canada, Mexico and the U.S. on a common Amero currency as a new monetary unit. This could signal preparations to replace the dollar. The one-hundred dollar bills that have flooded the world could be simply frozen. Under the pretext, let's say, that terrorists are forging them and they need to be checked."
When asked how Russia should react to his vision of the future, Panarin said: "Develop the ruble as a regional currency. Create a fully functioning oil exchange, trading in rubles... We must break the strings tying us to the financial Titanic, which in my view will soon sink."
Panarin, 60, is a professor at the Diplomatic Academy of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and has authored several books on information warfare.
http://en.rian.ru/world/20081124/118512713.html
This man also stated that Russia and China would become the financial regulators of the world, which is one more ridiculous things I've ever read.
One after another, this nation's recent presidents have been turned out to be flim flammers and wastrels of one kind or another. The one who is about to shuffle out the back door of the White House turned out to be a cross between Gomer Pyle, Willie Sutton and Heinrich Himmler. At this point, we need a great president, truly a person of wisdom. We all hope Obama is it but . . .
LOL......Thanks, Mordechai for another excellent post, and Happy Thanksgiving.
The Press does not seem to Understand the benefits of "The Carlyle Group", the
corporation that includes among it's investors, the likes of Rumsfeld, Bush the Daddy, Cheney, and of course Robert Gates, the new appointment by Obama.
Who is Gates? simply an active member of the Carlyle Machine.
This same machine is invested in Military Contracts. Take for example that
mysterious Airplane that is suppose to take off vertically, and then go on
horizontally. This plane, {F-22Raptor} is still not considered safe to fly, yet the Military Machine, ruled by the Bushco, has ordered into play the F-22 Raptor, and
has put it into play in Iraq. Why does Obama feel that he needs this purveyor
of Military contracts to the Carlyle Group? The buble has to burst before it's
to late..looks like the Clintons are in power again..The F-22 Raptor is being
built by a Calyle Group owned factory, and is owned by the Calyle Group. Where is the press and he Peace crowd?
Correction:
The Vertical-Take-Off_&_Landing (VTOL) airplane is the V-22.
The F-22 is a stealth fighter that requires a conventional runway.
Your statement that "(t)he F-22 Raptor is being built by a Calyle Group owned factory, and is owned by the Calyle Group" is incorrect.
Michael Hudson's article at www.counterpunch.com/hudson11262008.html yesterday points out that Obama is moving initially to placate the top 1% wealthy class. Summers for example, according to Hudson, was responsible for helping the Russian kleptocrats (the top 1% wealthy) gain control of the Russian economy after the Soviet collapse. It seems Obama's primary concern is to stabilize and preserve the Corporate Banking industry, the MIC, and to ensure that the wealthy class can sit back on their leather recliners and continue sipping their brandy's, secure in the knowledge that THEIR man in charge is well heeled and with the program.
Only then can Obama start to throw some bread crumbs to the truly hungry, just enough though to keep them alive so they can "go shopping", and just enough so that they stay distracted and busy trying to pay bills and not question their overlords.
Yep - I agree.
Joe
obama said this then did that. he needs to support Israel and defend american interests in the world. otherwise i agree with commondreams posters. obama is no good. arizonaforever.
I would have more confidence if Obama:
Successfully investigates and prosecutes the perpetrators of the events of 911.
Ends the war against the Iraqi people.
Ends the war against the Afghan people.
Stops sucking up to Israel.
Gives the Palestinians their lands back.
Returns to the descendants of the indigenous First Nation Peoples that which was taken from them. Return their lands, their spirit and their pride.
Pay it's UN debt.
But I fear the poster above may well be closer to the truth of the matter.
Sophie Scholl-The Final Days
It is an Illegal Occupation, now in Iraq, if you cannot even properly term it how do you expect the Occupation of Gaza and the Genociding of Palestinians to be ended by HOPE.
If you cannot comprehend it is a Sectarian "war" in Afghanistan, Taliban, Pashtun, Tribal wars, Drug clashes over $$$, then how can you think it will be ended by President ELECT HOPE????
BillofRights
"Yet most leaders on the left are keeping to themselves any criticisms of the centrist quartet that will help shape and implement Obama's foreign policy. "
There's nothing "Centrist" about who Obama is appointing to his administration. What's called the center in the United States would be right-of-center anywhere else in the world.
"He asserted his own position in contradiction to [the] anti-war movement," she said. "He wasn't us. He didn't pander to the crowd."
But Katz, a well-connected Chicago public-relations executive, said that some liberals chose to ignore the part of the speech where Obama stressed that he was not against military force and actually urged more aggressive pursuit of al Qaeda.
"A lot of people took his position on Iraq and projected our politics onto him," she said. "And that was never him. It was never true."
This is something that I've noticed over and over again. Progressives are projecting their own ideals onto Obama, who of course doesn't share their beliefs. Obama is PRO-EMPIRE. He's not going to shut down the MIC, he's not going to reign in Israel... He's not going to pursue a progressive agenda in Washington. To think otherwise is naive. Those on the left that thought Obama was one of them were sadly mistaken. The whole "Change we can believe in" is a crock of shit designed to dupe progressives into supporting Obama.
So right Crock 'o shit, progressive, whatever you want to label yourself as flavor of the year. I am still Far Left Liberal, so screw me, that is what I am got F$$Ked the same way, yeah? Dog Day Afternoon, "I like to get KISSED when I'm gettin' F&&KED!"
BillofRights
Obama has indicated that he MAY (rather than WILL) revoke Bush’s ban on stem cell research; which not only deprived hope from thousands of victims with incurable or terminal disorders, but also defied the will of the majorities of the populace and congress.
In view of urgent needs to reverse the immeasurable destruction from so many of Bush’s unprecedented environmental and social abuses, such ambiguity is not a good sign and cannot be tolerated. Obama was propelled to the presidency because of the gravity of these abuses--and his promises to nullify them. He must be made to understand that his voters will rebel against him if this is a prelude to his mode of operation
I'm hoping as hard as I can.
All politicians are opportunists. Whether they are totally corrupt, moronic, murdering hacks like George Wanker Bush, or possess some measure of decency, they are all opportunists. Let's hope that Obama is going to attempt to redefine the political center so it will now include those things that for the last thirty years were considered poison. Let's hope that his selection of these yuppie Democrats and bureaucratic Wizards of Oz from the Bill Clinton era are a way of accomplishing this. Let's hope.
you know we are going to have to find a new lexicon, suddenly the word 'hope' has been debased by it's overuse and incorrect application.
Nope, Elite trumped that. Truly IRAQ WAR wins hand over fist, Wins Uh HUH.
BillofRights
The online NY Times article reporting Obama's decision to retain Gates as Secretary of Defense began with this sentence:
“President-elect Barack Obama has decided to keep Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates in his post, a show of bipartisan continuity in a time of war that will be the first time a Pentagon chief has been carried over from a president of a different party, Democrats close to the transition said Tuesday.”
____________________________________
I quickly scanned the article, which quotes various sources supporting this premise, but I didn’t see a direct quote explicitly citing “bipartisan continuity in a time of war”.
We’re at “war”? The only “war” I’m aware of is the mythical, fictitious “Global War on Terror” declared by outgoing President Unitard and his moribund criminal maladministration.
Oh, that’s right-- Obama piously latched on to this concept and affirmed it during his campaign. It was evidence of his “pragmatic” brilliance, because of the received wisdom that the lizard-brained troglodytic masses, fka the Silent Majority, must be fully reassured and comforted by the certainty that our President is, first and foremost, a competent and enthusiastic Warlord who will Protect Us from enemies-- even, maybe especially, ephemeral and imaginary foes. Not to mention the foes that US foreign policy creates and manufactures for the purpose of sustaining the martial mood.
Surely the erudite and intellectual new Commander-in-Chief is perfectly aware that this Orwellian “we have always been at war with Eastasia” subterfuge is just that. I guess Obama has "shrewdly" decided that it’s best to wait until he’s safely elected to his second term before stepping out from behind the curtain and revealing the truth to the troubled and fearful masses. Until then, it's, "Yes, Virginia, there IS a Global War on Terror."
Pragmatism! Is there anything it CAN’T solve?
That said-- Happy Thanksgiving, My Fellow Amerikans.
• just my 2¢
Best damn 2 cents I've had in years my friend, I Thank You.
[meant for 2 cents]
BillofRights
Thanks for saying so. I was pleased to see that others "get it" when I read your comments!
• just my 2¢