BENEATH THE SPIN * ERIC L. WATTREE
Who is Barack Obama?
Hello, Rosemary. I was just sitting here contemplating our earlier discussion. You know how much I respect your opinion, so I’m up in the middle of the night contemplating what you had to say about Obama, and my reaction to his policies. Since you’re generally so in touch with the mood of the people, as an after thought I decided to run this response as this week’s column. You said:
“E, I don’t think the President is trying so much to be a kiss-up to the Republican Party as he is trying to show that he cannot help it if the Republicans have decided they would rather be unprofessional and not fit to hold the offices they hold in Congress. Think about it. If he came down to their level, what would his credibility really look like? He’s still trying to show that he’s the President for everyone, no matter if some want to be ignorant. A lot of times people mistake kindness for weakness. NO, I am not looking at him through rose-colored glasses. I’m being realistic. He has a hard road to navigate, and his choices are bad and worst .”
Much of what you say is true, Rosemary, but that doesn’t explain why he’s circumventing not only the U.S. Constitution, but international law to give the Bush/Cheney regime a pass on their war crimes. He’s betraying a serious case of American arrogance by declaring that we need to look forward, and not backwards. He’s a constitutional scholar. He knows full well that’s not his call. He swore to uphold the Constitution, and through extension, the rule of law.
So as much as I like the president personally, I can’t ignore such a serious circumvention of the law, and blatant assault on American ideals. I’m speaking out because I have a responsibility to speak out. It’s not just government’s role to uphold our values, that’s the responsibility of each and every American citizen. We cannot just sit back and expect justice to prevail – we must raise hell to see to it that it does. And we must always give principle priority over politics.
The man that I though I voted for, and supported so passionately, would be the very first to recognize that his failure to adhere to the rule of law in this matter diminishes America. He’d understand that his failure to act creates a class of people who are above the law, and sets an ominous precedent that will allow future demagogues to act with impunity against both the American people, and the people of the world. Who’s to say that the next group of tyrants won’t start by rounding up ‘suspicious’ Muslim, then Black Muslims, then Black people? Why shouldn’t they – we’ve set a precedent saying they can do it with impunity.
So some things are more important than worrying about providing political ammunition to the opposition. I’m more concerned about becoming so loyal to one man or ideology that we allow ourselves to be caught flat-footed, like so many others have been throughout the course of history. For example, I wonder how many families were destroyed by financial ruin after blindly opposing healthcare reform during the Clinton administration because they put ideology and personal loyalty before common sense when some politician told them that healthcare reform constituted socialism? Thousands I would guess. So if the Democrats were on their game they would have gathered up some of these people and featured them in political commercials during this current debate.
Because yet again, the Republican leadership is using that very same tactic to manipulate their base. Yet again, they’re manipulating the people who have blind faith in their leadership to promote the status quo. And once again, they’re actively exploiting the concerns of their base over being displaced by minorities, and having ‘socialism’ disrupt the lives that they’ve come to know – even though tho many of them can’t even define socialism.
While we on the ‘left’ like to make fun of these people as dim-witted, I correspond with many of people on the right, and they’re far from ignorant. The fact is, many of them are quite intelligent. It’s just that they feel such a vested interest in refusing to accept the glaring reality before their eyes, that it’s causing them to cling to a group who is blatantly acting against their best interest. And if we’re not aggressively vigilant, the very same thing can happen to us.
I very much doubt that President Obama is a demagogue, but then, the Republican base feels the same way about people they support. But we can render this a moot point with a simple rule of thumb – never forget that we’re dealing with politicians. We must always remember that their very profession centers around the manipulation of smoke and mirrors, which makes it incumbent upon us to always hold their feet to the fire.
We must never allow ourselves to become so blinded by what a politician is supposed to represent, that we ignore what his actions say he actually represents. History has taught us that we must ALWAYS judge ALL politicians on what they DO, not what they say – and that includes Barack Obama.
So just call me cynical, but I need a very important question answered. If we’re willing to exhaust our treasury and sacrifice the lives of our youth to chase Osama Bin Laden for allegedly killing just under a three thousand Americans, how does that square with president Obama casually waving off the fact that Bush and Cheney killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi men, women, and children as inconvenient to address?
I have a problem with that kind of ‘justice’, as every American should, because it was done in our name. So as much as I like President Obama, simple logic tells me if he doesn’t have a problem with such a glaring injustice, I have to consider him a part of that injustice – an injustice that will never allow America to be completely safe.
This attitude that we have, and that President Obama seems to share, that the United States can walk away from the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people as simply ‘collateral damage’ is nothing short of American hubris. And I cannot be comfortable with any president that’s willing to embrace such a philosophy.
America needs to wake up. While we’re demonizing the people of Asia and the Middle East, we need to recognize that we wouldn’t even have a conflict with these people if we weren’t meddling in their part of the world. They’re not over here – we’re over there.
America doesn’t have to spend trillions of dollars to protect our security. That money could be spent educating our children, providing affordable healthcare, and revitalizing our infrastructure. All we have to do is ‘just say no’ to the military/industrial complex, and stop meddling in the affairs of others.
So when I look at President Obama, even in spite of how much I admire him, I have to ask myself, “doesn’t he know these things?” If he doesn’t, we have a problem with intellectual acuity. But if he does, we have a much more severe problem – why is he continuing to play a game that’s causing the death and suffering of so many people around the world?
So Rosemary, when I speak of President Obama caving in to the Republican party, I’m not just talking about on the single issue of healthcare; I’m talking about caving in to the status quo – which is much more serious, and goes directly to the issue of his overall character. During the campaign he promised change. That leaves me asking, where, and when?
Yes, many progressives in this country are mad as hell, and not just over a frivolous partisan issue. They feel lied to. Obama’s not dumb. He knew the message he was sending when he campaigned on change, and so do we – so we’re going to hold him to it.
Tell Gaddis I said hi.
Eric L. Wattree
wattree.blogspot.com
Religious bigotry: It’s not that I hate everyone who doesn’t look, think, and act like me – it’s just that God does.
You show a clarity of moral perception here that is so sadly lacking in so many on the “Left” –or at least so many of those who claim to be of the “Left”.
What you’ve written is wise, true and “liberals” badly need to understand it and press these points. Meanwhile, in this blog, for example, the highest “value” (which is the prevailing term today for the word people used to use but have largely dropped–maybe because they no longer have or hold them–“principles”) seems to be polite behavior.
Meanwhile, in this blog, for example, the highest “value”…..seems to be polite behavior.
Because unhinged and immature behavior is so much more productive…
How predictable that you just don’t get it.
You make my point for me. Apparently you think it’s for you to define what constitutes “unhinged and immature behavior” and, with it, determine that what you consider “productive” is a privileged priority.
In China, people with the very mind-set, the “values,” you practice here, produced the Cultural Revolution with its brutal reëducation camps for those whose behavior the party defined as not polite enough.
LOL!
Here you go,
“Hold high the great red banner of ” ‘Ask’-Thought”! – thoroughly smash the rotting counterrevolutionary revisionist line in literature and the arts!“
I know I’m a noob here, but if you drop the condescention in your posts, I’d be more apt to read them.
Out of respect for ELW, this thread’s author, this is my last post in reply to comments on polite behavior even though, interestingly enough, the moral rot at the heart of failed liberal political action and philosophy is, I am convinced, intimately related to the same issues at the root of the urge to make a fetish of polite behavior in discussion blogs such as this one.
You write,
“I know I’m a noob here, but if you drop the condescention in your posts, I’d be more apt to read them.”
I’m here to provoke people who otherwise show a stubborn resistance to thinking clearly into questioning their foolishness. To do that, I have to point it out. For too many, including liberals, to disagree with them at all qualifies as being “impolite”.
Anyone who prizes politeness over telling the truth, defending sound reason, and revealing mistaken, not to mention morally-bankrupt conventional “wisdom”, is someone who is not just a prisoner of a petty mind but one who, when invested with official authority will often yield to the constant temptation to enforce his views on others.
I never forget that everyone here is free to read or to ignore my posts.
If you choose to ignore them for so petty a reason as that you find the tone of my posts more important than their content in reasoned argument, then that, as far as I’m concerned points up at least one thing: that it’s your loss, not mine, if you prefer to ignore what I write.
The so-called American “Left”, which hardly exists at all in any case, is and has for long decades been routinely getting the shit beat out of it. We ought to carefully and extensively discuss why and how that is; and this goes directly to the points Eric raises in this thread of his.
But, instead of discussing it profitably, we don’t; and part of the reason we do not is that to do so invites anger, rage, intense dispute—in short, the very things which the inane, petty-minded fetish for politeness seeks to avoid by its smothering sterility.
That typifies a brand of liberalism which goes hand in hand with its conceptual twin, political correctness, and in which I recognize the reasons which prompt many ideological conservatives to view conventional liberal political thought with lively disgust and revulsion. It’s a brand of liberalism the patent stupidity of which is self-condemning and self-defeating. If it’s to be the prevailing paradigm here, as I fear is the case, then I’m bound either to find myself continually censored, banned or moved to drop this place as a habitual scene of my political participation as it would clearly be a waste of my time.
For me, dull stupidity–especially when it employs sarcasm–is far more obscene and “impolite” than anything I write in response to it. You may have noticed that the post which set off this recent little flap made no worthy retort on the merits. It was sheer empty sarcasm and except for its revealing that its author had completely failed to grasp the most essential point of the matter being addressed, it offered nothing of interest or value to the readers here, nothing. But it was my derision of that worthless and stupid comment which drew a rebuke.
I say again, liberals today are apparently morally lost and condemned to go on making themselves their opponents’ best allies in the successful effort to make liberal political thought and action a ridiculous joke as well as what should be seen as an immense disgrace.
You don’t want to read my posts? Fine. It’s your loss. You could learn things from them—if your priority wasn’t, above all, form over content. You have more to in reading my posts than in ignoring them, and not only on trivial points of spelling.
con⋅de⋅scen⋅sion:
ˌkɒndəˈsɛnʃən Show Spelled Pronunciation [kon-duh-sen-shuhn]
OK, never mind then.
You have apparently convinced yourself that the use of invectives and contempt makes you a better progressive than everyone else.
Who am I to argue the master?
I’m trying to picture you as a member of the Maoist elite. Pretty funny.
Whatever happened to the “don’t be a dick” rule? I’m sure it’s still in force but I can’t find where it was articulated. It doesn’t appear to be in the FAQ.
Speaking of the FAQ, you might want to consider doing an update. This section, for instance:
seems a bit outdated now.
Thank you. Well stated.
I have said this before and I will say it again:
The first major political figure…left, right, center, it matters not…in this country who stands up and says quite clearly and publicly “Fuck you!!! We are not taking this shit anymore!!!” will win and win big. It might be a right-wing demagogue; it might be a weak-minded middle roader and it might be Professor Jesus H. Christmas for all I know. Nevertheless, if it’s going to happen I hope to hell that it’s someone who really wants to change things for the better here, because whoever first figures this out will immediately become a very powerful national figure.
In the (so-called) left-wing bloggo world, the same kind of pussyfooting that is today getting in the way of a most likely well-meaning president has rendered the blog scene redundant, boring and impotent.
Call a spade a spade.
Go whole hog plus postage.
Grow the fuck up.
It’s been 50+ years since Lenny Bruce blew censorship right out of the water, and we still have not yet caught up with him.
Yup.
There it is.
Grow the fuck up.
The strongest and most intelligent men and women that I have ever known speak clearly and passionately about what they think.
In private.
But the power of their speech is emasculated when they polite things up for public consumption.
You want a revolution? (We certainly need one of some kind.)
Break the censorship barriers.
You want a personal revolution?
Break the censorship barriers in your own being.
Grow the fuck up.
Yup.
There it is.
Deal wid it.
AG
.
The first major political figure…left, right, center, it matters not…in this country who stands up and says quite clearly and publicly “Fuck you!!! We are not taking this shit anymore!!!” will win and win big. It might be a right-wing demagogue …
History seldom repeats revolutions … too much downside in memory. It’s more common for right-wing political leaders to team up with military brass to quelch a social uprising and establish a (renewed) dictatorship. Most European states have seen voters move to the right: Italy, France, Germany and the UK will in the next election. Based on similar social unrest as the Depression years and the rise of a Mussolini, Franco and Hitler, any new political direction will be to the far right. Be careful to let the genie out of the bottle!
After eight years of Republican rule under Bush-Cheney, the American voter wants change. The conservative rule in Congress has not been broken, the expectation of change has already been dealt a fatal blow within one year. The mid-term election of 2010 needs to be won by Democrats, or else all ends in failure once again.
Voters want to be aligned with a winners mentality or what is perceived as such. The role of MSM and the blogger community have a responsibility to communicate political views and encourage debate. The role of the military and industrial leadership will offset the true basis of a democratic nation: its citizens or “We The People”. Money equals power and buys political influence.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."
Lord!!!
If only we had one that needed quelching!!!
Ain’t no genie.
Just Kutie Katie, Brian “It’s All OK” Williams, Granny No-No (Have you looked at Diane Sawyer’s face? She transmits pain when she says anything.) and the Nightly Network (S)Nooze.
Yeah?
Which ones?
Harry Fucking Reid?
I got yer “winner’s mentality”.
Right here!!!
1976.
33 years ago.
A whole generation has grown up and copped out since 1976 and another one is in the oven getting thoroughly microwaved.
It was fiction then.
How much more is it fiction today?
You fear “…right-wing political leaders to team up with military brass…and establish a (renewed) dictatorship?”
How…quaint.
Who needs a military dictatorship when you have the public by the hypno-short hairs?
Who needs anything but well oiled opinion makers?
Not the PermaGov.
Bet on it.
AG