From earlier today . . . within another Reality Distortion Field . . .
And the predictable (ever since the female CNBC anchor blurted ‘it’s a feminine product!’ on air) jokes keep coming.
The Imperial City And The World
From earlier today . . . within another Reality Distortion Field . . .
And the predictable (ever since the female CNBC anchor blurted ‘it’s a feminine product!’ on air) jokes keep coming.
Can be just that. Or it can signify the rout of an army, unleashing shattering changes. The difference? Often literally what we choose.
So it is now, post-Coakley. Such pointless freneticism.
Who is surprised the Democrats can’t govern? Old news. 2006 and it’s limp aftermath gave us that tattoo you. The remaining variable is Obama. So people ponder can he be or is he worth salvage?
What will he stand for? What demonstrably will he fight for? With mind as well as heart? The Stiftung still doesn’t know. Do you?
We’ve all along suspected the answer is not much. But we didn’t think he’d blow a first year this badly. We have to apologize to a friend of ours at Fox News. He called pretty much this entire state of affairs last April, including the unemployment rate. We lost that bet. (Note to Doris Kearns Goodwin, enough with the bizarre JFK juxtapose at this point, in January 2010).
Whatever happens we hope the netroots collectively continue to identify promising progressive candidates and encourage them to run. Such excellent work allows people like the Stiftung to find out how we can help. Even with just a donation. Disagreement among the ‘Left’ [sic] about specific tactical issues ala confronting Obama or supporting them on this or that meme? All small potatoes. Eyes on the prize. A new ‘Democratic Party’ that can govern awaits.
Here’s a request. For the next seconds here put Coakley, Obama, Palin — everyone else — aside. And let’s ask ourselves the very questions we posed to Obama above: (i) what we stand for; (ii) what we demonstrably will fight for; and (iii) with mind as well as heart? See how clear it is that this moment in time is about us, not the careers or egos of politicians. These public figures recede to their proper place. Agents or employees. In life some work out, some don’t. Some will surprise us and even betray — ala Joementum. This is our story, not theirs. They’re just passing through.
We opened with the Valmy reference to make this point. If it’s our story then we can see a whiff of grapeshot for what it is. And ignore all the frantic babbling. Pick up the pieces and go forward. Some in our story are still in Act 1 (albeit the troupe is not promising). Is it possible Obama will recover and see a new noontide sun? Like Reagan, rekindle his connection with the American people before 2012 should unemployment fall? Perhaps. But then remember, he is simply our agent, our employee to take this country where we want it to go. The Stiftung personally won’t pretend to believe he knows the way.
The goal was always getting our country back from radical Christian Socialist Authoritarianism. If these agents or employees can’t do it, we’ll find some who will. This Coakley debacle is a wake up call. Avoid seductive intoxication with personalities and ‘life stories’. It may be the final price will shock us all. Possibly we are fated to endure yet another Great Restoration with all its ensuing rapacity. Just for the chance to throw the dice again for the right to even try and win back a trebly battered republic.
Still a deal worth doing. If *we* all collectively decide that’s where we and the country ought to be. In the interim, let’s all put the Olbermanns of the world on ‘mute’ (Tweety, beyond ‘mute’) and get back to work, wiser. It’s just a whiff of grapeshot. Forward, shall we?
That’s fair for Obama’s annual review. Average.
We don’t agree with Clive Cook’s panglossian look back. It’s trussed up typical Neocon tripe in part passed as international savoir faire – i.e., Obama did the right thing in Afghanistan but dawdled, wants to talk to people, and might force repeal of the Warlord’s fiscally irresponsible tax cuts. Cook gives Obama a “B” but infers Obama is the sort of bloke who might have been rude to an Astor and even let the second class and steerage passengers have a chance to jump ship on the Titantic. We do agree that Obama is a walking vacuum of leadership.
We are less generous. We think Obama is the empty suit, rhetoric without spine, balls or convictions. We understand the progressives’ disappointment with Obama. We lost some readers during 2008 with our emphasis on the Boy King and his likely equivocation and craving for status quo acceptance. Can’t make all readers happy. But we did warn. It’s a cold comfort. We secretly nursed hopes that Obama would be more than a transitional figure, that he had a core besides rhetorical intoxication. Not to be so far. To add insult to injury, Obama is not a very competent status quo politician; he shows no understanding of power or how to use it. His wasted Asia trip merely Exhibit ‘A’. Lunching with the plagarist Doris Kearns Goodwin on the glories of LBJ holding conversations in the Oval Office while taking a dump won’t help, either.
On the issue we care about most, restoration of liberal democracy, Obama has done almost nothing. He arrested the acceleration into lawless bureaucratic tyranny but did not reverse it. His DoJ filed arguments on State Secrets that would have made Fredo Gonzales and his lawyers accredited from schools run by TV studios proud. The unnecessary and totally voluntary brief filed on behalf of John Yoo is Addington-esque. How repulsive to see German war criminal arguments regurgitated by an Obama DoJ. Obama is seeking preservation and even enhancement of the PATRIOT Act. Closing Gitmo in rhetoric is fine. To transfer detainees to Illinois is political window dressing. On torture, we hear not a pin drop. Perhaps Holder really is investigating and building a factual record for the future. But his lips move so we’re pretty sure he’s lying. But we leave that open for future review.
The Bureau’s staggeringly wanton abuse of national security letters? Other other alleged ‘powers’. Nada. No accounting for how DoD elements operated domestically outside congressional oversight. No accounting for the even more pervasive than realized NSA turn inwards against Americans. No one is accountable. ‘Mistakes were made’. Nothing to see, old news. Contacting reform? It’s to laugh.
We don’t give Obama’s F-22 cancellation a whole lot of credit (someone tell Rachel Maddow that politicized subcontracting for defense contracts is decades old. Or just yank her teeny bopper naive butt off the air, please). Sure there were program failures, but that’s common. Cost overruns, too. The F-22 was the first major victim of the inter service knife fight as we enter the procurement scissors crisis. We’ve talked about that looming problem at length here since 2005 or so. It’ll get worse. It’s tectonic military industrial politics.
Obama kept the process alive in Copenhagen at the cost of almost every major U.S. goal going in. He certainly knee-capped the throngs of adoring international activists and governments. It’s a high price. Critics will eviscerate him for coming home essentially empty handed. Beneficiaries like the Chamber of Commerce and assorted interests will kick him anyway. Already the gloating over Obama’s Copenhagen ‘failure’ rings out.
In broader historical terms, a status quo power like the U.S. (no matter however enfeebled), is rarely a radical change agent. (The Warlord being neither status quo oriented and America engaged the world as radicalized destabilizer). With the exception perhaps of Wilson in Paris, American presidents typically are unwilling to get too far ahead of domestic political thought. And climate change is still too amorphous on Main Street. Strident proponents on either side turn people off.
Regarding how Obama abandoned pretense of multi-lateral equaility in favor of status-conscious Realpolitik he had no choice. For practical outcome purposes as well as the need to ingratiate ourselves with Chinese power. The tension between Obama and confrontational Chinese officials waved away with Wen’s serene power a classic Chinese performance.
It’s a punt. He saved the ‘process’. He lost his international halo. Open question remains whether the ‘process’ was worth the candle.