|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
 Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 12:13 pm Post subject: The Far Left and the Obama Administration... |
 |
|
My "I-told-you-so!" is more imminent than ever and he has not even assumed office yet.
"Well, he's not Gandhi." I imagine, for the time being, I will have to settle for that. But "he is a Nazi" is coming soon...
| Quote: |
Nearly 80 percent of Americans -- Democrats, Republicans and independents -- like the way President-elect Barack Obama is handling the transition, according to a Gallup poll. But there is discontent -- much of it from the left wing of Obama's own party and fueled by the blogosphere.
They knew Barack Obama wasn't really a liberal, says Chris Bowers of the blog Openleft.com. But Hillary Clinton as secretary of state? Robert Gates staying on as secretary of defense, and retired Gen. Jim Jones as national security adviser? Why, asks Bowers, did all three of Obama's top national security picks have to be people who supported the war in Iraq?
"Opposing the Iraq war from the start should have been an almost litmus test in order for someone to hold such a position under an Obama administration," Bowers says. "Especially since he won the election during the primary due to his opposition to the war."
And as a Democrat, Bowers says, he's concerned that Obama's picks for national security adviser and secretary of defense are both Republicans.
"Bill Clinton's second term also featured a GOP secretary of defense," Bowers says. "And for Dems to continuously put Republicans in high-ranking positions over the military sends a clear signal that the Democratic Party...isn't even confident that Democrats can run the military."
Liberal bloggers may have actually had some impact on at least one of Barack Obama's appointments. Last month, John Brennan, formerly a top official in the CIA, removed himself from consideration as the next head of the intelligence agency. This was after he'd been pilloried in the blogs for defending the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques that critics call torture. It was a big victory for the blogosphere, says John Amato of crooksandliars.com.
"You can't deny the fact that liberal blogs are a very powerful force in American politics today," Amato says. "And if you've been on the wrong side of torture, you're going to have a big problem with liberals and progressives."
And this is no time for progressives to get complacent, says Kevin Martin, who runs Peace Action. He says a lot of people on the left have the wrong impression of Barack Obama.
"You know, Obama said he wanted to get out of Iraq. He's not Bush or McCain -- so he must be Ghandi. That's the perception out there," Martin says. "Well, he's not Ghandi..." |
NPR Reports |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 12:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well what did they think he'd do? Appoint Ward Churchill to secretary of defense? What kind of country do they want?
Anybody who wants to understand Obama should read Dreams. He is a pragmatic, middle of the road guy. In law school he was close with both left and right wing people. I don't think he has the ability to be radical. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| What kind of country do they want? |
A Marxist-like Utopia that ceases even to exist as a nation-state and, moreover, that brings peace to the entire world once-and-for-all -- by, to cite a contemporary example, militarily intervening in the Sudan.
Then we shall all sing "Kum Ba Yah" until the end of time.
Anything less than this is "fascist."
I see them as an Oceania-in-waiting, however... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
catman
Joined: 18 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 2:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I have no doubt that by the end of his presidency the far left will have him labled as a sellout and an "uncle Tom".
Not that I believe that he is above scrutiny. There are certain issues in which he should definitely be held to task for. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 2:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hugo already called him an uncle tom, no? And so did Ralph Nader.
The hard left I think assumes that Black Americans must have a hard left political disposition or are blind by false consciousness. Though, I guess they think that about everybody. Annoying. That's prolly why they are such a threat to free speech.
I'm watching the Obama interview from this AM. The man is endlessly pragmatic. That may or may not be a good thing now but he sure isn't anything nearing a far left radical. Not even close. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 3:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| The man is endlessly pragmatic. That may or may not be a good thing now but he sure isn't anything nearing a far left radical. Not even close. |
He's pragmatic, but I already am witnessing extraordinary respect for the Constitution. This is not exactly surprising, given that he's a former Con Law professor. But its worth pointing out that he appears to have the right balance of idealism and pragmatism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The far left and the far right are more alike than different. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 3:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| ...or are blind by false consciousness. Though, I guess they think that about everybody. Annoying. That's prolly why they are such a threat to free speech. |
Thank you for reminding me of this angle. Yes, the far left employs "false consciousness" almost as frequently as it assigns mental illness to those who choose to follow other courses than the one they would force all of us onto.
________
I agree, Kuros. All eyes on E. Holder, from whom I expect exciting things in 2009. Also, I am starting to see what others have seen when they speak of B. Obama as a potentially great president, comparable to those he admires. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
catman
Joined: 18 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 4:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Hugo already called him an uncle tom, no? And so did Ralph Nader.
|
I believe Nader said that he has the potential to become an Uncle Tom.
Hugo probably did but who cares? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 7:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| The far left and the far right are more alike than different. |
Whether you turn 180 degrees to the right or left, you still end up going the same way - backwards. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tiger Beer
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 7:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| The far left and the far right are more alike than different. |
SO TRUE. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pkang0202
Joined: 09 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 8:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
All Presidents come to center. They always campaign further left or right of the political compass, but they always come closer to center when they are in office.
Its nothing new. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 10:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| mises wrote: |
| The man is endlessly pragmatic. That may or may not be a good thing now but he sure isn't anything nearing a far left radical. Not even close. |
He's pragmatic, but I already am witnessing extraordinary respect for the Constitution. This is not exactly surprising, given that he's a former Con Law professor. But its worth pointing out that he appears to have the right balance of idealism and pragmatism. |
Excellent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 10:27 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| mises wrote: |
| The man is endlessly pragmatic. That may or may not be a good thing now but he sure isn't anything nearing a far left radical. Not even close. |
He's pragmatic, but I already am witnessing extraordinary respect for the Constitution. This is not exactly surprising, given that he's a former Con Law professor. But its worth pointing out that he appears to have the right balance of idealism and pragmatism. |
Excellent. |
Far left radical???
Obama`s War Cabinet Toes the Line of Bush Policies
Obama`s national security appointees (like all his earlier ones) aren't "change to believe in" or what people expected for their votes. Their agenda is business as usual, and they`ll continue the same failed Bush administration policies at home and abroad.
by Stephen Lendman
December 1 brought more disappointment but no surprises. Obama's national security appointees (like all his earlier ones) aren't "change to believe in" or what people expected for their votes. They're recycled establishment figures. Their agenda is business as usual, and they'll continue the same failed Bush administration policies at home and abroad. Washington's criminal class is bipartisan. Obama was chosen to lead it and is assembling a rogue team that's little different from the one it's replacing.
For "security", it means:
-- maintaining the "strongest military on the planet" and do it by outspending all other countries combined;
-- continued foreign wars;
-- possibly another against Iran;
-- permanent occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan - directly and with proxy forces; Obama saying he'll withdraw all US forces from Iraq in 16 months (around mid-2010) is false and misleading;
-- a reinvented Cold War against Russia;
-- an "absolute" commitment "to eliminating the threat of terrorism (with) the full force of our power;"
-- inciting instability anywhere it serves US imperial interests with special emphasis on resource-rich Eurasia, including the Asian sub-continent; Exhibit A: the Bombay (Mumbai) terror attacks that Michel Chossudovsky explains have "the fingerprints of a (carefully planned) paramilitary-intelligence operation (and) are described as India's 9/11," or at least a mini version of it; the usual suspects are blamed; the purpose is to incite fear and more violence; the consequences - an internal hard line crackdown, increased tensions between India and Pakistan, and a military opening for Washington to intervene further in the region; and
-- additional North American militarization as evidenced by a disturbing December 1 Washington Post report - that (on the pretext of national security) the Pentagon will deploy 20,000 troops nationwide by 2011 "to help state and local officials respond to a nuclear attack or other domestic catastrophe;" three "rapid-reaction" combat units are planned; two or more additional ones may follow; they'll be supplemented by 80 smaller National Guard units and will be trained to respond to chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, high-yield explosive, and other domestic "terror" attacks or disturbances; in other words, homeland militarization and occupation is planned using combat troops trained to kill.
Media Reaction to Obama's National Security Appointees
The New York Times suggested he's "put(ting) the rancor and even some of the rhetoric of the presidential campaign behind him on Monday as he welcomed his chief Democratic adversary into his cabinet and signaled flexibility in his plans to withdraw troops from Iraq." He stated: "I will listen to the recommendations of my commanders (and it's) likely to be necessary to maintain a residual force to provide potential training (and) logistical support to protect our civilians in Iraq."
According to the Cato Institute's foreign policy director, Christopher Preble, Obama chose Iraq war supporters, so it "suggests that we will only get more of the same."
The Washington Post highlighted Obama's "high-powered national security team....to face a complex security picture." It quoted him calling for "a new beginning, a new dawn of American leadership (and) the power of our moral example."
According to UN ambassador-designee Susan Rice, it's a team "to prevent conflict, to promote peace, combat terrorism, prevent the spread and use of nuclear weapons, tackle climate change, end genocide, fight poverty and disease." More on those aims below.
The Wall Street Journal suggested that Obama's national security team will make "a clean break from Bush administration policies on Iraq, Afghanistan and overseas diplomacy." It will differ from "an over-reliance on the military and a failure to devote enough resources to political reconciliation and economic development in those nations." More on that below as well.
Obama's National Security Designees
On December 1 in the UK Guardian, author Jeremy Scahill called them a "Kettle of Hawks" so it's no surprise that hard line neocon writer Max Boot was jubilant over the selections and said they "as easily (could) have come from a President McCain." He and like-minded ideologues believe this puts "an end to the 16-month timetable for withdrawal from Iraq, the unconditional summits with dictators (aka democrats like Chavez, president Ahmadinejad of Iran, and Fidel and Raul Castro), and other foolishness that once emanated from the Obama campaign." His selections "should be powerful voices for neoliberalism which is not so different from neoconservatism."
According to Boot, Obama will pick up right where Bush left off with a near-seamless transition. "Only churlish partisans of both the left and the right can be unhappy with the emerging tenor of our nation's new leadership."
According to former Chicago congressman, federal judge, and Clinton White House Counsel Abner Mikva in a Chicago Jewish News article, it's also true for the nation's Jews and the state of Israel. As some call Clinton 'the nation's first black president,' "I think when this is over, people are going to say that Barack Obama is the first Jewish president." Rabbi Arnold Wolf agrees in saying Obama is "embedded in the Jewish world." Given the team he's assembling, there's every reason to believe they're right.
Hillary Clinton
She's co-heading the team (with Robert Gates) as Secretary of State designee, so it's clear no change is planned given her hard line neocon ideology. As one analyst puts it: it's why many on the left "are grinding their teeth" about her and other former Clinton administration appointees.
Back in May, CounterPunch co-editor Jeff St. Clair referred to her "Gothic politics" that offer no hope for needed change. He called her "constitutionally wedded to a stern neoliberalism, a disposition (she's unable to) camouflage."
Darker still is her hawkishness, far enough to the right to be indistinguishable from Joe Lieberman or John McCain. It's why one analyst calls her a "war goddess" and with good reason. She supported the invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan and still does. She voted for the Patriot, Homeland Security, and other repressive acts.
She's extremely bellicose, endorses attacking Iran...
more at link
Posted: 2008/12/05 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 08, 2008 10:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| So, the far left thinks he is far right and the far right thinks he is far left? Far out. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
