I Hate to Say I Told You So
November 25, 2008
by Larry Sakin
My, my, my, it’s only been three weeks since starry-eyed Americans voted Senator Barack Obama into the presidency, and already he’s walking away from many of his promises.
The latest came today, when aides to the president elect said the economic stimulus plan Obama will present would not include any of the tax increases Obama, as a candidate, had said he would impose on taxpayers who make more than $250,000.
This is not a surprise, considering Obama’s choices for his cabinet so far, and his pick for chief of staff.
Let’s start with that chief of staff, Congressman Rahm Emmanuel. As is now known by many, Emmanuel became a Wall Street whiz-kid after leaving President Bill Clinton’s staff in 1998. He is the son of a former Israeli terrorist, and believes strongly in supporting Israel’s efforts to hold the Middle East under her sway. Emmanuel supported President Bush’s plan to invade Iraq, and has gone on record with his support for an American military role in Iran.
Obama’s choice for Secretary of the Treasury is Tim Geithner, a former protégée of Henry Kissinger and the man who as President of the Federal Reserve engineered the Bear, Stearns bailout in March of 2008. Geithner also served as Under Secretary of the Treasury in the Clinton Administration during the tenures of Wall Street power-player Robert Rubin and his successor Lawrence Summers.
Gosh, for a candidate who showed so much concern for Main Street, Obama seems to be stacking the deck of his cabinet and staff with Wall Street sympathizers. Imagine that!
Emmanuel’s positions on the Middle and Near East are dangerous. Our fervent support of Israel, plus America’s sixty years of screwing around in Near and Middle Eastern politics is what created the blowback we witnessed on September 11, 2001.
It’s enough that Emmanuel possesses hawkish views on the Near East, but Obama’s choice for Secretary of State, Hillary Rodham Clinton, is also hawkish on Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan. Emmanuel and Clinton together is a recipe for disaster.
Obama is also considering Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano as Secretary for Homeland Security. If Napolitano takes the job, Arizona will be run by one of the worst Republican pols since Evan Meacham- Arizona Secretary of State Jan Brewer.
Since the Arizona legislature is ruled by nut-case Republicans, Brewer will only add more trouble to this toxic mix. You might as well put the state in a time machine, and dial it back to the dark ages.
Brewer is one of those vaguely attractive, dimwitted automatons that Republican power players love. And Brewer will smile vacantly while the legislature flushes the progress Napolitano has made for the state in the last six years.
Of course, Obama hasn’t considered that. Arizona voted for McCain anyway, so as far as he’s concerned- to Hell with us.
So let’s add all this up- no tax increases on the rich for at least the near future, a chief of staff and Treasury Secretary who will lean heavily towards Wall Street, hawkish views from the chief of staff and Secretary of State on the Near East… sounds like the same policies we were supposed to be leaving behind with the exit of George W. Bush.
Yes, Virginia, the American people have been bushwhacked yet again. Obama’s rhetoric about change and putting the people first only had a shelf-life of November 4, 2008. Now that Obama has what he wants, all the beautiful progressive prose is gone, and he is turning into the centrist Democrat more experienced political observers knew him to be from the get go.
And frankly, the American public has no one but themselves to blame. It’s so easy for us to become intoxicated by the wonderful speeches, those movie-star good looks, and all the praise heaped upon the candidate by the mainstream media. We’ll follow anybody who tells us what we want to hear. When we find out our hero has feet of clay, we become disillusioned, and start looking around for another to save us from our own stupidity.
Comments
6 Comments »
-
Bob's Bail Out Plan by bobl-tlm
-
How Do You Like Deregulation Now? graphic politics by Dicky Neely
Come on Larry, do you rant just for rants sake.
No doubt there were millions of people who found spiritual joy with Obama’s nomination and election. However, there were many more millions, who felt they had no other viable short term choice. And speaking personally,I seldom put personalities before principals, and thus would not have voted GOP……no matter who had lead their ticket. eddie
Well Eddie, I’m unsure what your comment has to do with my article, but will attempt to address it.
To say that millions felt that had no other viable short term choice is just silly. There were many choices, including voting for an independent candidate, voting ‘none of the above’, writing in a candidate and so on.
Of course, the two main political parties want people to believe they have no other options other than their candidates. This is one of the reasons why Democrats and Republicans have dominated the governance of our nation for years. So what this comes down to is: who do we really want running our country? The slick, well-oiled candidates the major parties offer, or candidates that truly hold values similar to ours? It is when Americans feel they have no ‘viable short term choice’ they ought to seek alternatives.
Realistically, how? Not someday but now, how?
Realistically we had two viable options: McCain and Obama this time.
It will be possible to develop our system into one where more choices are actually available to us not just as statements of ideology but as working possibilities. Once we have proportional representation in a majority of states for the Electoral College vote, it will no longer be an obligate two party race for president every four years. But we must get that done before a third party candidate of any kind has a realistic chance of winning.
If we want a system where we have other choices we have to build it, starting now. Build the third parties in each state, using local elections to do it. Put proportional allocation of electoral college votes into effect in most states. And get an independent media built up to the point where most Americans can see more than the entertainment that passes as news on the corporate networks.
If we work on that now, along with fair elections, then we can insure we have a variety of actual viable options next time or the next.
Heck, I never believed we’d elect a black man president in my lifetime so I am willing to believe that we can accomplish all of this is we try.
I appreciate the scenario you offer, Norla, even if it is a bit too high up and far around conceptually.
We have already seen the viability of an alternate party candidate within this last twenty years. Ross Perot captured the imagination of the American public and had a strong showing in the general election. I didn’t support Perot’s views and still don’t, however, he was able to use the media effectively to get his points across. More importantly, it made both of the major parties re-assess how they approached voters on economic policy thereafter.
As for the independent media, we’re in the age of the internet, where there are a millions of independent voices and media outlets. We! Magazine is among them. The number of articles supporting President-elect Obama as a force for change was overwhelming on this site. So Norla, are we to wait for the ‘other guy’ to change how the independent media promotes candidacies? To use a well-worn phrase “If not us- who, if not now, when?”
We must be the change we seek. If we know of good candidates to promote, than we need to promote them. If we know a candidate is not what s/he appears to be, we ought to have the foresight to investigate; dig a little deeper, and provide the electorate with the information they need to make an informed choice.
To simply say Obama and Senator McCain were the only realistic viable choices is to limit the potential democratic electoral system you write of. It is good to have hope that things will change one day, but hope without action towards that horizon is useless.
it’s more than merely the choice between two candidates. Whoever won would come face-to face with people who hold real power and are neither compelled nor inclined to play the “one person, one vote” game politely referred to as democracy by them — and by those of us not in the money. But that’s hardly news: i’m sure you all know of Marx’s executive committee of the ruling class. it hasn’t gone away.
But, that’s no justification for throwing in the towel, especially now. Details matter. The details of Obama’s life can;t help but present openings for action, for people inclined to look for them. Please don’t spend time telling me only how Obama is making his bargain with power. Help figure out where openings are. People who hold power just haven’t been to enough places to prepare them for anticipating every opening that the first organizer-president (not just person of color) of a G8 country (as far as i can remember) might make a move for.
And please don’t spend time telling me that im being another pollyanna, because is know that obama won’t be able to roll over just because one of us said so. in a way, that’s probably a good thing. it’s way too early to throw in the towel. It’s probably going to take effort to make a different difference than we’ve become accustomed to power allowing us. But it’s effort we need to make, hopefully together, knowing that we will all have to compromise, including learning how to compromise.
bob
Bob,
I don’t believe you are being another Pollyanna nor do I believe anyone here is ‘throwing in the towel’. My article is based only on President-elect Obama’s choices for his staff and cabinet. He could certainly surprise me, for which I’d be grateful. I’m just not holding my breath that much will change during the Obama administration.
Beyond that, it should be noted that we’ve always had many choices for presidential candidates. To say that Obama and Senator McCain were the only two viable choices does a disservice to the notion of democratic elections. Some do not have the funding the major party’s do and that obviously hurts them. But even when a majority party dark horse is elected, like Jimmy Carter, there is no assurance s/he will receive support from the Washington power establishment. It remains to be seen if Obama will receive that support or not.
Larry