EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Corporate Win: Supreme Court Says Monsanto Has 'Control Over Product of Life'
- How the US Turned Three Pacifists into Violent Terrorists
- Cornel West: Obama 'Is a War Criminal'
- In 'March Toward Disaster,' World Hits 400 PPM Milestone
- Revealed: How US State Department 'Twists Arms' on Monsanto's Behalf
Popular content
Today's Top News
Barry in the Bush With Smiles
It takes a real artist to render a crushing majority into a hapless political object.
And Barack Obama is a real artist.
He’s had quite an impressive week. At least for an anvil.
Here’s one New York Times headline, regarding the Olympics debacle: “Chicago Is Rejected in First Round of Voting”. Impressive.
Here’s another: “Jobless Report Is Worse Than Expected; Rate Rises to 9.8%”. Can you say “Bye-bye, Barack”?
Ah, but he was actually just warming up. David Paterson, the governor of New York, bitch-slapped the president for being stupid enough to lean on Paterson to get out of the 2010 race. Paterson is a disaster as governor, and Obama is worried that he’ll drag down the Democratic ticket, lowering the president’s majorities in Congress.
The first problem with that calculus is that there are fifty states in the union, notwithstanding the natural arrogance of New Yorkers who tend to think they own the planet. The Democratic Party’s problems are far bigger than New York. They begin on one end of Pennsylvania Avenue, and end on the other. As usual, most voters will be using the mid-term elections as a gut-check on their feelings about the current government. If the inept, cowardly and inert Mr. Obama needs someone to resign in order to save the party, that dude in the mirror with the big ol’ grin would be the most efficacious choice. Charlie Cook is now giving the Democrats only a fifty-fifty chance of retaining their majority in the House, which is now a whopping 79 seats. Man, you have to really work at it to blow something that badly in nine months time.
The second problem with asking Paterson to step out of the race to save Democratic majorities in Congress is that Obama has them already, in lopsided amounts, and he’s not doing a damn thing with them. Instead of kicking some butt to line his own caucuses up and forcing them to pass some real serious legislation that the president demands (see Bush, George W, for illustration. Also, Reagan, Ronald W.; Johnson, Lyndon B.; and Roosevelt, Franklin R.), this fool is doing deals with Republicans who are trying to destroy him, and the very predatory industries that are precisely the problem with American healthcare. I guess he must think that the GOP is just kidding. You know, like they were with Clinton. In any case, why worry about maintaining your majority if you have no intention of ever actually using it?
And the last reason that Obama is idiotic for meddling in state and local politics is because he was sent to Washington to save the country from the sixteen or so serious crises his predecessor bequeathed him, and about all he has going for him is the good will of the public who gave him the job. Spending your time dicking around with who should be the Democratic Party’s nominee for municipal dog-catcher is not exactly what people had in mind when they gave him this mandate. By going to Europe to beg for the Olympics, or by immersing himself in local politics, this chump is spending his political capital at a furious pace. It wouldn’t even be worth the effort if he was getting what he was asking for. But of course it’s far worse that both Paterson and the IOC slammed the door in his face, as publicly and as emphatically as imaginable. If Obama taped a “kick me” sign to his back, he could hardly signal any better his ineptitude and his willingness to get rolled at every conceivable opportunity.
There’s more, of course. Another headline reports that “Panel Finishes Work on Health Bill Amendments”. The public option, already a weak sister to any real reform of the predatory wealth extraction system masquerading as national healthcare, was of course voted down by the Senate Finance Committee referred to in the title. Obama has yet to seriously weigh in on any preferences he might have. Apparently he is going to wait until the end of the legislation process. Assuming that he actually has any preferences – and I don’t, unless you count carrying water for corporate power and Wall Street – how astonishingly stupid is that as a strategy? After all the grief and months of effort Congress has gone through to maybe produce a bill, is it conceivable that they’d want to entertain some major new change at the last minute?
Then there’s Afghanistan, where the president has his own general running around painting him into a policy corner with only one option. Any military guy who tried that under Bush got summarily cashiered, even though they were actually telling the truth. You know, like maybe 160,000 GIs weren’t gonna be sufficient to occupy a country of 25 million pissed-off Iraqis. Say that and your career was over, Shinseki-style.
Is anyone else sensing a pattern here?
Obama would make a great nineteenth century president. You know, all those guys with names you can never remember, because they pretty much didn’t really do anything? Back in those days, Congress was king, and presidents – except during wartime – were essentially glorified clerks, executing the Congressional will, as per their Constitutional duty. That’s certainly one way to do it. It’s just that it pretty much isn’t what people have come to want and expect for the last century or so. And it sure as hell isn’t what Obama promised in the election.
But he has really specialized in being an acted-upon object, rather than a political protagonist, despite possessing the most powerful position in the world, commanding majorities in Congress, an initially adoring public wishing him tons of good will, and all manner of crises to warrant if not demand bold action. In his reticence he is not only carrying forward a fine Democratic Party tradition of recent decades, but in fact refining it into an art form. The pattern works like this: Republicans charge like bulls through china shops and grab the mantle of power, proceeding then to ram their program through, no matter the casualties. When they reach levels of greed, corruption and failure so excessive that even comatose Americans can no longer stand it, some effete Democratic stooge named Carter or Clinton or Obama is called in to hold down the fort long enough for the regressives to regroup and start the cycle again. But Obama in action – better rendered as ‘Obama’s inaction’ – makes Clinton look like a litter full of Mike Tysons crammed into an overheated pressure chamber by comparison.
It’s astonishing how Democrats can never seem to block anything the hard-right wants to do, even when they have majorities, while the GOP kills everything the Democrats supposedly want, even with minuscule minorities in Congress. Gee, one could almost get the impression that Democrats don’t really want anything much different from Republicans, but just have to adopt a different alt-persona to hide their intentions from the public. Republicans use guns, god, gays and Gaddafi as distractions from corporate looting. Democrats strap on their cardigan sweaters and try really, really hard to do something, but gosh-darned it, just never seem to get anywhere.
As for our friend Mr. Obama, he seems busy unlearning every lesson of the last three decades. He doesn’t appear worried that the right will challenge his legitimacy as president ‘cause, of course, they never did that to Carter or Clinton. He doesn’t seem worried that they’ll happily destroy the country if necessary in order to wreck his presidency because, of course, there’s little precedent for that. He doesn’t much care to use the bully pulpit and strong-arm Congress to get what he wants because, of course, that never got Reagan or Bush anywhere.
I can’t believe I’d ever say this, but the question Obama should be asking right about now, is “What would Bush do?”
I’ll tell ya what. He’d jam his legislation down the throats of the other party, putting the fear of god in them if they dared to oppose the emperor. He’s rip people’s lungs out and stuff them back through their eye sockets if they looked at him cross-eyed. He’d lie to members of his own party and carpet bomb their entire home neighborhoods if they dared vote against him. If any media talking head didn’t tell the lies they were programmed to speak, he’d kidnap their kids and send them to Gitmo, treating them a good waterboarding for every one of their birthdays. And, he’d call in Rove to stomp some people good, the nice Republican way.
What would that look like? Here’s journalist Ron Suskind relating an inside taste of what he observed while waiting outside the Ol’ Karl’s office for an interview, back when he was running the White House political operation:
“Rove was talking to an aide about some political stratagem in some state that had gone awry and a political operative who had displeased him. I paid it no mind and reviewed a jotted list of questions I hoped to ask. But after a moment, it was like ignoring a tornado flinging parked cars. ‘We will fuck him. Do you hear me? We will fuck him. We will ruin him. Like no one has ever fucked him!’ As a reporter, you get around—curse words, anger, passionate intensity are not notable events—but the ferocity, the bellicosity, the violent imputations were, well, shocking. This went on without a break for a minute or two. Then the aide slipped out looking a bit ashen, and Rove, his face ruddy from the exertions of the past few moments, looked at me and smiled a gentle, Clarence-the-Angel smile. ‘Come on in.’ And I did. And we had the most amiable chat for a half hour.”
Why won’t Obama do this? Why won’t he unleash all the powers at his disposal, knock heads together, and smash political opponents to smithereens in order to get his way? Two reasons. First, he wasn’t a complete personal screw-up for the last half century, acknowledged even by his own parents to be a total embarrassment. He therefore doesn’t have the burning need to show the world they’ve been wrong about him his whole life, like a certain other fellow recently seen roaming the halls of the West Wing.
The other reason is that Obama doesn’t actually appear to be doing anything that requires any particular toughness. He’s not trying to sell a bullshit war or dismantle Social Security, like Bush. He’s not trying to end legal and institutional racism in a country where it was as pervasive as bibles in ‘Bama, like Lyndon Johnson did. He’s not attempting to bring the country kicking and screaming into the twentieth century, even after it was already one-third over, like FDR was.
In fact, he doesn’t really appear to be doing much of anything, including producing the much-vaunted ‘change’ we heard endlessly about during last year’s campaign. Unless, of course, you count the nice demeanor with which he continues the predatory policies of Reagan, Clinton, and the Bushes. This is essentially George W. Bush’s third term. It’s Barry in the Bush with Smiles.
Obama more or less just seems to want to hang for a while, passively swaying in whatever winds happen to be blowing through at the moment. That might have worked in the 1950s, or even the 1970s, but not today. The brownshirts of the American right have been playing for keeps for some time now. And, while it’s true that they can be their own worst enemy in normal times, these are hardly normal times. Failing to address the real economic pain people are feeling, failing to provide remotely meaningful healthcare reform, failing to clean-up the corporate predators slamming the public with bad mortgages, sky-high credit card interest rates and bailouts of the already rich – all of these are an invitation for some change Obama can believe in, especially in 2012. If he insists on being a political object, the right will gladly turn him into one. It will be a freakin’ anvil too, not the fifth face on Mount Rushmore.
This is not kid’s stuff. These mobsters are possessed of insatiable greed, and they are clever beyond belief at mobilizing the anxieties and inadequacies of a public already dumbed-down to a level of political immaturity that can barely keep pace with the amped-up fires of their personal rage to which it’s dangerously coupled. How many re-run episodes of this mini-series do we need to see before we get clear on how it turns out?
The right is wrong on nearly everything, of course – the elites because they lie, and the shock troops because they’re frightened of their own shadows and therefore find blessed relief in every possible palliative from the pope to Palin. But they are correct about Obama being a complete patsy. They like to bring that up in the foreign policy context, because it’s good for scaring voters, and because it doesn’t remind moderates of just who is actually rolling this punk here at home (a very fine example of which was provided by the cheers that went up from our nice super-patriots when America lost the Olympics bid). But the truth is that a movement that should have been discredited to the point of annihilation by its very own actions is now instead setting the agenda in Washington, and the guy who won the landslide seems busy trying to push the mud back up the hill so that he can be buried by it himself, instead of the people who pretty much literally want to kill him.
I really don’t know what to say or think about this dude anymore. The way democracy is supposed to work is that his desire to hold office and the public’s preference for certain policies should reinforce each other and impel us toward a mutually satisfying presidency. Instead, though, he trucks along seemingly oblivious to the fact that the exact opposite is occurring.
This country is sinking in every way imaginable, and he will be held to blame in 2010 and 2012.
And so he should be.
It’s just that that will also mean the return of the monster set, absolutely foaming at the mouth after four years in the wilderness not holding the presidency to which they believe they’re fully entitled to own.
And then Obama will join Clinton, running around the world making speeches and writing books. Maybe they’ll even do joint appearances.
Thanks for that, Barack. You’re a real patriot.
Oh well. At least you got the important stuff right.
You won’t have ruffled any feathers while being president.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...


45 Comments so far
Show AllYeah, a lipstuckup artist!
Obama will be relieved when the Democrats lose control on Congress after the 2010 elections. At that point the Republicans REALLY will be derailing his agenda and he can end this charade where the Republicans are taking the fall for the Democrats' gunning for Wall Street.
Good piece and right on about Obama's contant caving or maybe these are his policies. But as far as I'm concerned its unfair to call Carter effete. He may have been our last statesman. His energy speech was great and outlined a plan that would have saved us from so much of what is happening now such as wars for oil. But he wanted to tax the oil companies and the American people didn't want to hear the truth and have to limit their consumption, drive less or wear a sweater. The oil giants savaged him.
But Obama hasn't even tried.
But he won the Nobel PEACE prize!!!
Look at all the conflicts he has ended the World over!!
Hail Obama the Prince of peace!
Well GW.....you finally got me...I'm embarrased for our country. This is so undeserved and so many people around the world deserving it, its embarrasing to have our President get it.
If there were an Olympic political gymnastics event, our star athlete would be B.O.
He shows his finely honed skills on artfully played deceptions like the "Sotomayor double somersault": a Latino woman who looks like a liberal but is immersed in the traditions of the Princeton power elite. A perfect 10!
He used the "you'll-never-hear-from-the-White-House-again triple loop" to strongarm anti-war democrats into voting for a huge war appropriations bill, scoring a solid 9.5.
He tried to pull off the "we-don't-deserve-it-but-give-it-to-us-anyway backflip" in Copenhagen, but he tripped on his ego and fell on his ass, scoring a Zero that had him and his coaches going back to the locker room in tears, jeered by his mates as well as his competition.
And now, in the "you-haven't-really-earned-this-but-we're-giving-it-to-you-in-the-nebulous-hope-that-you-will-do-the-right-thing" category, he takes home the gold! It's a good thing too, because the Nobel Prize committee really didn't want to give it to the second runner up, (but real winner) Wall Street.
eliane: good stuff - very funny but substantive too
i'm just thinking there is one more award - the forward looking award given to the candidate who best: does-all-the-crap-we-hoped-he-wouldn't-but-we-know-we-are-going-to-get-right-between-the-eyes award
and the consolation prize is a big jar of vaseline...
How Obama?..."the imagery and delusion that passes for elections (in america)".....N. Chomsky
Another good one from Green. How any president can have failed this miserably so soon into his presidency--it must set some record. Maybe that's why they gave him this Nobel. Keep two wars going at the same time, wars you were ostensibly elected to END, and be championed as an emissary of peace! Work feverishly night and day for months, taking up nearly all of Congress' time and energy, for "health care" only to deliver the exact same death-dealing prescription to a sick, exhausted, defeated public. The list goes on and on, as Green has noted here. What can we do but deplore it?
Keep in mind that most of what was written in this article can be explained by.....
President Obama is not a Liberal, but is a Centrist.
(This explains things like why he is so predisposed to trying to work with Republicans. Etc.)
David Michael Green, I especially liked your sentence, "This country is sinking in every way imaginable."
Yes it is.
As an extreme Liberal, I KNOW that our country would have become MUCH MUCH better if Dennis Kucinich had been elected.
(I know, fat chance)
Heck, many of the people writing articles here at CommonDreams.org would have make America a better country than Centrists such as Barack Obama. (Though if McCain/Palin had won, we would be in EXTEMELY terrible shape.)
Repeating.... President Obama is a Centrist, so keep in mind that he stands mid-way on the political spectrum, as much a liberal Republican as he is a conservative Democrat.
No need to cover the tracks. Just point to the Republicans and say, "well, do you want THOSE guys in power?" It works every time for the Democraps.
Obama had little choice in the Olympics thing. If he had NOT gone, with the leaders of all the other candidate countries going, he would have been derided as being unpatriotic, a traitor even. "Obama hates America" would have been the new chant.
Claiming that he was spending political capital by making a quickie visit to campaign for the Olympics is a bit much; how many people actually care that he went?
What difference does it make--it isn't like he really makes an effort anywhere--for anything. Does he even care?
And actually, it looked like the Chicago thing was something he had some enthusiasm for--something he could handle--that is why the rejection was such a sting.
I certainly am in no way a supporter of Obama.
Just pointing out that he really had no choice. Once Chicago chose to try for the Olympics, he HAD to go, as president, AND as someone from the area. And I doubt most people care anyway, it isn't as if he spent months traveling all over the world canvassing support for the bid. He made a quickie visit.
The left is better off directing its fire on him, on other issues.
I still point and wonder about that 'plane incident' in July 2008 (look it up), when everything changed that week, his position on FISA, the appointment of Biden, and the subsequent kowtowing to the opposition...I think he was 'Wellstoned, Karnahaned, and Peroted'. What would you do? Sometimes it seems the supremacists are using him as the scapegoat for what has happened and will happen to our world and nation at the hands of the powerful greedmongers (which planet are they planning on destroying next?). Just wondering
I'm beginning to think this was the plan all along. By all accounts it looks like Mrs. Obama likes living the live of the ultra-wealthy, even if they aren't yet. Yes, I am that cynical now. Let's face it, it works. But even Clinton has done more work than I believe Obama will do as an ex-Prez. He may be more like GW in this respect, too. Remains to be seen.
He knows what he's doing, and if he's ever in doubt, he has Rahm right there to remind him -- and Rahm definitely knows what he's doing. It was always about power and glory. A junior senator to President in less than four years, catapulted to fame, writing to books -- I believe there was a plan from the beginning and not much doubt as to the ending. I have never been one for conspiracy theories, but you look at what's happening and it gets you thinking ...
The Democrats are Ginger Rodgers to the Republicans' Fred Astaire. Watch G.R., everything she does is the exact opposite of F.A. He puts his right foot forward, she pulls her left foot back. He steps to the left, she steps to the right. The exact opposite! Only if you watch them together you start to realize it's the same dance. And they're doing it together... Organize a viable third party or America is over.
A third party, a viable one, is about the only way we are ever going to get out the this deep do-do we are in with the callous corruption that is rampant and I doubt that anyone in Congress gives a hoot whether or not they are reelected as they have lined their pockets to overflowing and don't give another hoot about what is good for this country, they all have offers of great paying lobbying positions. Why in the world stay in Congress when they could be climbing up that big ladder of corporate corruption. A new party could at least bring fresh blood and ideas (and just maybe some honest)to the table and maybe not at first but could certainly do some influence peddling down the middle to give a swift kick to both sides of the aisle. Where do we sign up?
You know, I have to wonder.
Speaking of Charlie Cook.. happened to catch him the other day responding to the news that Obama's numbers were on the rise. He claimed it was an outlier poll, exception to what the others were trending. Yet, it was all over the news that Obama, like the economy, was on the up. There was the hughly unpopular bail-out of Wall St, followed by failure to lead on the healthcare front where the people's interests were unrepresented, followed by noises of unpopular escalation in the Middle East and then the rejection of Chicago as an Olympic choice...Even Tweety wondered if Obama had "lost his connection" to the people. I have to wonder if the Nobel is a desperate pitch--a life rope thrown to a flailing US president--whose trajectory is spiralling downward and the world is worried about the alternative.
What the hell is the difference--at least it is politically correct to hold the Right accountable for what the Democrats are given a pass for. Besides, the Democrats can go back to claiming that they can't do anything in the minority--providing them cover for their complicity.
Excellent!
All that and the Nobel Peace Prize too.
Great article!
Although this sentiment:
" The other reason is that Obama doesn’t actually appear to be doing anything that requires any particular toughness"
clashes with this one:
"... The brownshirts of the American right have been playing for keeps for some time now. And, while it’s true that they can be their own worst enemy in normal times, these are hardly normal times. Failing to address the real economic pain people are feeling, failing to provide remotely meaningful healthcare reform, failing to clean-up the corporate predators slamming the public with bad mortgages, sky-high credit card interest rates and bailouts of the already rich.."
Sorry guys, you miss the point here. Obama won the peace prize because they are not his wars. He hasn’t done anything wrong. He hasn’t done anything right either. He’s just there, like the gardener who became president. Only that was a movie so they listened to him. This one is only talking to himself.
Djan
Final line of the article:
"You won’t have ruffled any feathers while being president."
And THAT is an argument against inane calls for civility--which are demands for passivity.
djan: So, you're B.O. is like Chauncey Gardner, aka Chauncey the gardner?
Frankly, I do believe that's the case.
"Obama won the peace prize because they are not his wars. He hasn’t done anything wrong."
OMG ! LMAO !! Obama chose to continue Dubya's wars and he's proud to own them. Try paying attention and keeping up. Geeeez !
<<
Paterson is a disaster as governor, and Obama is worried that he’ll drag down the Democratic ticket, lowering the president’s majorities in Congress.
>>
Why the fuck does Obama need a majority in congress? He gives the republicans their way every time.
Every time I read Green's articles I am laughing and crying at the same time. I really need to get to my library and read Susskind's books. I've heard him on various shows, and after reading that quote in this article, I know I need to open his books.
Reference last weekend's SNL opener with Fred Armison as Obama. And what about this Rahm Emmanuel? I thought he was supposed to be Obama's bulldog? Where's he been? What's his function? All I know is he's issued statements that health care reform does not require a public option. He holds dual citizenship--is he the fixer for the Israelis? I have talked to people who believe Pres. Obama has some terrific meta-strategy up his sleeve and that when the time's right he will blow away the opposition and lead us all to the promised land, or the land where a lot of promises were made.
I'm not sure, right now, if this guy's just talks perty or if he's got something up that sleeve, I'm having cognitive dissonance too...
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
Big Media fed Rahm's ego by painting him as some sort of Karl Rove equivalent as if the political tea leaves weren't all lined up for a Dimocratic come-back in '08 anyway. He's tarted up as this tough Chicago pol but all he's done so far is go for the easiest low hanging corporate sell-outs one after another. He's a lobbyist waiting out his term in office for the revolving door. He knows he'll make a killing on K Street after all his bank fellating & Big Insurance/Pharma felching. Look for Rahm 3 years hence on Dancing with the Stars with Ann Coulter as his dance partner competing against James Carville and Mary Matalin.
Sioux Rose
Dang, METAL, this is classic! Your cynicism has become a high art. If I had a magazine I'd offer you your own column. GREAT stuff!
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
If I could get paid by rich right-wingers to read my columns aimed at making them cynical enough about their own misbegotten worldview to be alienated by it that would be the bee's knees.
"If the inept, cowardly and inert Mr. Obama needs someone to resign in order to save the party, that dude in the mirror with the big ol’ grin would be the most efficacious choice."
Many thanks. This is one of the best articles I've read on CD in a long time.
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
Be careful what you wish for. If Obama resigned, then Joe Biden would become president. The DLC Dims like Pelosi have that Beltway starstruck-with-themselves look in their eyes after only 9 months. They've gotten a taste of K-Street crack and the false buzz of mainline power entitlement. Their DLC and blue-dog snotsuits are like a third stage brain tumor in the Democratic Party that has to be removed before the Party's cannibalistic zombification spreads to the entire country. We all know that isn't likely to happen. They will probably lose or come within the skin of their teeth of losing the House in '10. Then the stop-clock will be running on the Democratic Party. If Obama and the Dims can't get fundamental economic priorities tilted back in favor of the little guy & gal after that, then it's time not just for a national progressive leadership summit, but for wealthy progressives and alienated liberals to start funding the movement to build a Progress United Party (PUP), and for them to start approaching the few decent small (d) democrats in Congress with buyout offers to join the new PUP in exchange for campaign money support both from wealthy progs & libs and from the new party's grassroots campaign war chest.
The choice between the Dims and the Rethugs now is the choice between fast cannibalistic zombies (the GOP) and slow cannibalistic zombies who occasionally throw-up on themselves (Dims), but they'll both convert the U.S. into a national zombie arbeitslager where the ownership class will sweatshop most of us to an early grave in a poisoned, remnant post-natural environment.
Come on - really? Still?
"Frankly, they own the place."
The same owners hired a front man named Bush to cover for their Operation Loot The World.
Said owners didn't suddenly have a collective epiphany - they still own the place, and, this time, they needed a front man The People could 'believe' in, because it's a bit tougher to steal when you've already stolen everything.
If I owned a crappy Freak Show, I'd hire BO to hawk the rubes inside - he'd fill the place. And when guests complained that there weren't any Freaks and there wasn't any Show, he'd chill em out with some pretty words about a future, better Freak Show he's hard at work developing...
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
Green has the right tone and is venting the disgust many of us feel, although his article is filled with self-contradictions. This guy's a poli-sci prof but it looks like he didn't really bother to even read through this piece after he typed it out before publishing it.
I heard the reason Obama was given a Peace Prize had something to do with some nuclear arms policy change of his, but he's ramping up R&D on the DU deep bunker-buster bomb, increasing funding for R&D and new warheads across the main nuclear arsenal, and spending millions of dollars on building up a Clark/Subic Bay-scale facility in Guam--as if the Pentagon is slowly preparing for war with China. China IS pushing for oil trades in non-U.S. currency and most of us know what happened to the last country to openly push that idea shortly before 2003. If that's where the Pentagon's head is at they better start genetically engineering smarter, radiation resistant chimps, orangutans and gorillas to fill our niche in the food-chain so there'll be primates in the future to read of our Sino-accursedly interesting times. They could out-breed them with Bill Clinton, Lynn and Mary Cheney--who all deserve to be strapped onto cactuses and forced to watch the Simpsons musical version of Planet of the Apes 8 hours a day for 5 years.
Obama's military advisors are as Kentucky fried as his economic advisors. I suspect McCrystal wants to sell him a biannual escalation to an eventual troop strength well over 200,000 within a couple of years. It still wouldn't be enough to secure the larger and more geographically treacherous border areas. They would need somewhere close to three quarters of a million U.S. troops in "the AfPak" to effect security and successful nation rebuilding. I think Obama will trickle in 20,000 and quagmire himself but good while not accomplishing ANYTHING but bleeding the Amurkan empire to death.
Our numbnutz misrulers won't fully economically mobilize for Iraq, Afghanistan and the TalQuaeda in Pakistan, because they don't have any intention of securing any borders, or securing widely scattered populations, or rebuilding physical infrastructure, or protecting workable nascent economies, or catalyzing democratic institutions from the bottom up, or replacing the patchwork puppet regime of Karzai. We cannot resolve anything in the AfPak with these half-assed non-plans that don't have an economic, governmental or regional diplomatic component to them--and the idiots in charge won't even study how it was successfully done in the past in Europe and Japan. Meanwhile, we'll be dropping somewhere around $20 Billion dollars a month of borrowed Chinese money on Iraq and the AfPak by this time next year--while the Chinese push harder and faster to unseat the dollar as the global reserve currency.
You'd think with all the trillions of dollars and global policy ramifcations at stake the leadership of the GOP and Dims would give the gimps they nominate to run for the presidency of the USA a simple battery of tests on their historical knowledge of empires, economics and science. They've all been sequentially revealed as ignoramuses since Carter--who at least dared to publicly tell Americans of the need to conserve energy and decrease our dependence on imported oil.
But just as the Bush-Cheney neo-cons blew into Iraq on ideological methane & a prayer and botched the occupation from the git-go without ANY contingency plan, the Dimocrats are doing the same thing to the real economics of our now insanely over-extended military empire.
It's up to a new united progressive party to TELL them what the contingency plan will be, take over the reins of power and implement it.
If Obama were as smart as the MSM claims he is AND knew how to bust some grapes, then he'd be thoroughly cleaning house at the CIA and NSA and rebuilding both institutions from the ground up because they are both posing a direct threat to him and therefore pose the same threat to true national security. This is because many in the CIA (and the Hayden supporters inside the NSA) clearly view him as potentially running interference with their essentially lawless power--which they abuse to elevate the protection of a small coterie of multinational corporations above the good of the country at he expense of the vast majority of the American people. Obama should be investigating and prosecuting anyone involved in implementing warrantless surveillance without prior executive branch approval (read: Michael Hayden) and everyone who legalistically advanced, planned, refined, implemented or practiced torture. Obama and the Dim leadership should sit down in a secure room with the new top brass of a newly rebuilt CIA and NSA and tell them that one of their new responsibilities is to spy on, arrest and prosecute (or, if that is not possible because it would reveal classified, legal and effective national security programs and procedures), to terminate with extreme prejudice ANY corporate or former CIA/NSA/military individuals or groups who seek to use violence or assassination against elected members of the U.S. government or their families (remember Senator Paul Wellstone? Whatever DID happen to the black box flight recorder on that aircraft?). They should eliminate mercenary contracts of ALL kinds and return the professional military to doing all the support jobs they used to do. By tolerating overpaid unaccountable mercs they are rewarding right-wing militarists and advancing their extremist cause while providing them with on the job training for probable systemic terrorism inside the U.S and abroad.
We need a president who knows how to earn respect from all the people and instill fear in the right people.
"remember Senator Paul Wellstone? Whatever DID happen to the black box flight recorder on that aircraft?"
In 21st Century Oceania, war is peace, and black box is buried box.
Sioux Rose
METAL: I honor and appreciate the depth of your analysis. If any of the "watchers" are observing this forum, if I were you, I'd be more careful if I went out alone at night in suspect areas. Your thought process could prove dangerous to them... and they're sensitive about that sort of thing.
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
I'm just an overfed longhaired leaping gnome too broke to bother with simply for venting about stuff in the public domain. The people you're talking about are after the whistleblowers and journalists seeking to expose stuff that still hasn't seen the light of day. I don't see how certain reporters have stayed alive except that they have cult followers who would raise hell if something dubious happened to them. They are killing prominent journalists in Russia and elsewhere. There has yet to be a "Deep Throat" for the Bush-Cheney era, and their crimes are so extensive it would take more than one to do them justice. We'll know it's empire over in Amurka by several signs: (1) It will be open hunting season on journalists and progressive members of Congress who approach Wellstone's level of prestige and influence, (2) poor people will become unable to afford to even shop at Walmart, (3) if real unemployment hovers somewhere over 25% for more than two years (4) full spectrum hyper-inflation will hit the lower-class for over a year.
I don't know. It appears that many Americans still believe this is a 'free republic' and that elections really matter. This country has been bought and paid for by the corpora-fascists - Obama is just the most recent puppet.
Starting up a new, third party would be great. A major problem is that every aspect of the media is owned and controlled by global conglomerates (6 main and a few ancillary), who are not much interested in changing the status quo. So, good luck overcoming the giant propaganda machines that are so skilled at feeding fear to the people and skewing facts to control behavior.
Another barn-burner, David. I still maintain the two "major" political parties are different in name only. Hopelessly corrupt and patsies for corporate America. We need a new political party that is squeaky clean and represents the people of this country, not those hell-bent on sucking the lifeblood from their very veins, and indeed, their souls.
If we had a decent and honest multiparty system, like every other advanced democracy in the world does, where would Barrack find his home? He would find it in a center right corporatist party. That is who he is and that is what he really believes. It is summed up by a belief that existing corporate capitalism should mostly have its way. "They have a right to make a respectable profit but they have to be accountable." In a multiparty system most of us on the left would not be voting for Barrack and would not expect him to bring about he reforms we want. We would be the Democratic Socalists and sometimes we would be in power and some times locked out. That would be a sane rational system. What is pathetic in our present system is that we on the left work to elect a center-right president, beg for his attentions. We scrape and plead for access, fear offending Rahm Emanuel and despite all evidence hope that Barrack still has some good intentions for us.
The closest we can come to being respected in this wacked out two party system is to become a defined voting block in opposition to the corporate Democratics. We can do this by parking our votes with the Greens when the corporatists are so egregious that we can no longer support them. I think we are there now. The corporate wing of the Democratic party rules. Make them lose in 2010. Discredit them. If they move Democrats further right then collect the defections to the left and become stronger. If they want to win again by moving left, let them come to us and ask what they need to do to forge a winning alliance. I predict they would want us back in 2012 and would then ask us what we want. The least of our demands should be improved and expanded Medicare for all.
dumddown old fart
How does not trying and not doing be considered failure? Dems are learning from the Repugs how to govern forcibly as the minority party.This will help them after 2010 if they develop the courage to attempt it.