Tweet
President Obama is looking about ten years older than candidate Obama did – and about ten light years further to the right. In last night’s speech from the Oval Office, when he talked about Iraq, it was as if Obama was accidentally reading one of George Bush’s old speeches:
We have sent our young men and women to make enormous sacrifices in Iraq, and spent vast resources abroad at a time of tight budgets at home. We have persevered because of a belief we share with the Iraqi people –a belief that out of the ashes of war, a new beginning could be born in this cradle of civilization. Through this remarkable chapter in the history of the United States and Iraq, we have met our responsibility. Now, it is time to turn the page.
Then, after acknowledging his disagreement with Bush throughout the war, he turned around and praised the former president:
This afternoon, I spoke to former President George W. Bush. It’s well known that he and I disagreed about the war from its outset. Yet no one could doubt President Bush’s support for our troops, or his love of country and commitment to our security. As I have said, there were patriots who supported this war, and patriots who opposed it. And all of us are united in appreciation for our servicemen and women, and our hope for Iraq’s future.
Without a single hint of irony, Obama drew common cause with the man and the war policy he eviscerated as recently as 2008. The speech consistently reflected neocon talking points such as the need for nation-building and the spread of democracy, and the belief that the Iraqi people will be better off because of the U.S. invasion. . . .
The speech left no doubt that Obama has forsaken his base on the left (or is taking us for granted), and is instead working to please the moderate Democrats and independents who are in danger of being lost back to the Republicans. How else do you explain his continued drift to the center-right?
To be fair, Obama has made good on his promise to remove all combat troops from Iraq in his first 18 months – but that shows his political savvy rather than any true anti–war beliefs. This dramatic shift in tone shows that Obama’s positions are based on political calculation and not personal conviction
He was staunchly anti-war in the 2008 primaries because that was his only chance to gain momentum. But then he shifted to appear “tough on terror” to win in the general election. Now, with a brutal midterm election and his own reelection in 2012 looming, he is retreating even further from his original progressive stance and is sounding downright conservative, even as he keeps his promise of withdrawal.
It’s politically deft, but perhaps a little too politically deft. Progressives aren’t falling for the bait and switch this time. While we have been removing combat troops from Iraq, we have sent more to Afghanistan and have been bombing in Pakistan (not to mention the escalating tensions with Iran). One way or the other, we’re going to be fighting in the Middle East for a long time. As in so many other areas with Obama, it’s a different verse, but still the same song.
Perhaps, then, 2010 is finally the year for progressives to part ways with the Democrats. How many times will we have to get poked in the eye, the way we were poked last night, before we finally pull the trigger?
And I didn’t even mention how insulting it is for Obama to praise the man who should be getting investigated for war crimes. It reminds me of the final scene from Animal Farm.
94 Comments
It may have something to do with the fact that he still has all the Bush leftovers advising him. Maybe he will take a little action after the midterms and rearrange the deck chairs. At least it will be a play in the right direction for flailing demowhales.
It is a pity that the first Black President of the US has such a horrible legacy to leave. We all hoped he would follow thru on his campaign words. It’s ended up being another GOP giveaway in every issue!
A very perceptive post.
I was very surprised and taken by the beginning of Obama’s speech. The part that concerned Iraq. It seemed he was preaching the Bush line on the entire venture. Add to that the fact that the drawdown was only the continuation of the drawdown that Bush had arranged, I wasn’t sure what I was hearing from Obama.
Aside from that, it was a big mistake to make any speech. He should have just let the day slide, he was already getting press on the “last of the combat troops” thing anyway.
Thank you, and agree with your sentiments. He should have just let the day slide.
I appologize for the cross-post, but;
Lately I’ve been thinking that it’s possible we progressives have been laboring under a rather fundamental misconception; that being that we are fighting against the eventual corporate take over of our government.
We’re wrong about that.
What we’re experiencing is life on the other side of the tipping point.
Considering the obvious cowardice that makes up a large part of almost every politician’s character, the impunity with which our rulers act is a clear indication that they’ve made the calculations, and they believe they have nothing to fear from their constituents with respect to their actions.
We, the voters are no longer a force to be reckoned with, what with unlimited corporate money allowed into the election process, and hackable electronic voting systems in the hands of political operatives, so as to preclude the possibility that we might ignore the bought-off media and some how vote for the ‘wrong’ candidate.
We should seriously consider the evidence provided by last night’s presidential speech, in that it appears our president doesn’t care what we think.
So anyway, we can stop thinking that we’re fighting to maintain control of our country, because we’ve already lost that battle.
I’m not giving up, but I’m facing the facts.
You are right. I’ve long known that lobbyist direct the issues in Washington. Until this Koch brothers expose came to light I had no idea how deep and far it went.
Our representatives do not represent us at all. They are like Chipendale dancers, dancing for dollars from any large entity and what they want. Until we can force money out of elections, it will not change. I wish there was some way that an average, middle-class person could run for the leader of this country. Oh yeah, and WIN!
you could be right Wat4, in that this is life on the other side of the tipping point. Bushco was a complete sellout to Corporate America. Obama’s only accomplishment to distinguish him from Shrub is that he can pronounce “nuclear”. This is W’s third term.
The voters will always have the powwer. What appears to have happened is that the voters do not agree with our agenda, and the President’s team is tone deaf.
I disagree, Obama ran on a platform of change, he offered us the hope that he intended to reverse the course of war and greed, but promptly morphed into Bush2/BushLite after election.
This wasn’t an accident; it wasn’t the result of pragmatic compromise.
It’s clear in hindsight that Obama was vetted by those who actually control our country’s political system and he was selected as the democratic candidate, you can bet his selection was predicated on his implicit, if not openly stated promise to stay the course his owners dictated.
Being allowed to vote for candidates chosen by the MOTU is not the same as having power, by any stretch of the imagination.
Because if he isn’t one then he’s the next best thing to being one.
This has been another episode of easy answers to easy questions. Thank you for listening. Please put as much as you can into the restoration fund donations box as you leave after the service ………
Thank you for saying this. I was going to say it, but you saved me the effort.
You’re welcome. :-)
heh He prolly carries a copy of Rebuilding America’s Defenses around like Sen Byrd carried the Constitution. Well, he’s got a war he can call his own now. Fuckin’ asshole.
SD I am giving away no secrets when I say that our hiatus on “Guides” is bacause we are frankly preparing for the round in Irak. You’re well aware of what we do so you can imagine our feelings right now. I will say the projects and programmes are going rather well.
What’s about to happen in Afghanistan is going to be really rather grim I suspect
Put yourself in the place of Joe or Jane Q. Public. The system sucks, you are out of a job, and here are your choices:
(1) Government create millions of jobs rebuilding our infrastructure, our safety net, etc., and using any means necessary that things keep running if mass capital tries to sabotage our lives.
(2) Cut taxes for the richest corporations, in the desperate hope that they will use their profits to at least create a few more jobs.
Choice #1 is obviously preferable. You know Wall Street has totally fucked us. BUT, if you are convinced that Choice #1 is not an option, then what else can you do but say, “well, we gotta give #2 a chance,” and if fucking over some ethnic or religious group helps my odds, sad but …
They’ve done a pretty good job convincing folks that #1 is off the table. Even the left and the blogosphere seems to have given up, seriously uncomfortable with the notion of “using any means necessary.” The blogosphere sounds very angry. Keeps exposing the details of which everyone already knows in the broad strokes.
But demanding that the government create jobs, they just don’t do it.
Pointing out that our war in Afghanistan is a disaster? Sure. But demanding that the U.S. get out now? Oh, let’s be realistic, the most we can hope is that Obama keeps the promise of STARTING to pull out (if conditions permit) next year. Like he kept his promise to shut Guantanamo.
And what am I offering? Nothing complex. Nothing deeply strategic. Just one thing. Dump Obama.
In the 60′s, the world was much less partisan. I was young then, a true simpleton. I didn’t see things in terms of “the Democrats are doing …” or “the Republicans are doing …” All I knew was that MY government was murdering people in Asia and starving people in Appalachia and beating civil rights marchers in Mississippi, and Lyndon Johnson was the head of MY government, and one obvious step was to Dump Johnson.
But now I’m so damn smart, I know the ins and outs of the system, all sorts of strategic bullshit. I’m too sophisticated to think that MY government is murdering people all over the world, and MY government is claiming it can murder, imprison and torture whom it wants in the name of national security, and MY government has no answer to mass unemployment and homelessness, and that Obama as president is the head of MY government, and that if that government’s actions are criminal, then the capofamiglia Obama is a criminal, and the least we can do is DUMP OBAMA.
Yelling and roaring and screaming hysterically are all good fun. But they lack a certain specificity. My useless sophistication tells me that there is a system and dumping Obama alone won’t change it, and all that. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But it has a certain specificity largely lacking.
Challenge him in the Dem primaries?
Challenge him with an independent run?
Challenge him with both and more?
Thing is, if we can agree on this, then we are in a position to begin working out the specifics. Demanding a master plan now is simply a way of avoiding getting down to it (soldiers are cutting us down).
Great post! I have no idea how to challenge him that will save the party. I could get a sign and enlist all my unemployed brethern to stand on sidewalk. “JOBS NOW” Do you think the MSM would cover it?
Mush from the puppet .. zzzzzzz
(good post, tho)
I just woke up from being asleep for 6 years. Has the mission been accomplished yet? /s
Depends on whose mission you are talking about. Cheney certainly has accomplished his. Halliburton has a contract to service the oilfields in southern Iraq.
Thank you! I left it out there to see who would take the bait. Many missions have been accomplished. Just not the big lie one. Hearts and Minds? Excuse me?
I told Attaturk how cinical I’ve become about Obama’s actions. I still think this combat mission ending is another switcheroo.
As he removes troops and renames the remaining ones, the contractors increase. Contractors can be labeled under general expense and not necessarily war funding or whatever terminology they choose to use. Therefore, the Iraq war deficit will just plain vanish.
I could be wrong, often I am. I just keep thinking of Petraeus or however his name is spelled and those other NEOCON war mongers.
I don’t know how it is where you live, but where I live that is a pretty radical statement and will be perceived as such.
Not that I disagree with the general direction of your argument.
All in all, I think it was a speech that was intended to be forgettable. And a pivot to push for keeping our commitment for veterans benefits and whatever the pre-election ideas are for the economy. I don’t know if it served its intentions well; we will see.
If that craptastic speech was meant to be ‘forgettable’ he should have left out the part about what a fantastic patriot Idiot Son is. Now, no one will be able to forget what a conniving opportunist this arrogant shitstain is. I had next to zero respect for the office of the presidency yesterday morning. I have ABSOLUTELY NONE now.
Sorry for the glibness of my comment. I’ve just run out of ways to say I hate this so much!
And, a big thanks for Mark and the Gorillas. You really do put your money where your heart is.
90: 12-18
They really do live by it. I feel privileged to work with them.
Beautiful. Reminds me of The Widow’s Mite.
Yes thanks for that. – That or the sermon on the mount too. Regardless of which you pick both the poetry and the type of person and deed it celebrates are beautiful. As most of the “Guides” are Muslims (I’m a boring old Irish Papist :-) ) the quote from the Qur’an seemed appropriate.
If you haven’t seen me post this before, my sister’s SO is Amir Hussein, VP of the Faculty Senate at LMU. He’s fabulous, and I learn a lot about Islam and the Qu’ran from my sissy. He’s deep into peace and justice. He speaks all over the world, sissy got to accompany him to speak in Egypt last year, and he’s very good about responding to emails. Blessings, friend.
Ah thanks – I’ve heard of him, nice to know.
Sorry to be ignorant, but is that from the Qu’ran?
Yes 90: Lines 12 to 18
Words have meaning and that quote would not be true because as consequence of the war the CAT treaty was in effect. We should not turn the page on un-investigated admission of TORTURE against the Geneva Convention, Convention Against Torture and the Nuremburg Protocols until the final investigations are complete. There are quite a few unsolved MURDERS also, so not so fast with the page turning.
As to the lies that lead to war that’s something else and not a treaty requirement.
The President is choosing the wrong side of history to align himself with.
“The President is choosing the wrong side of history to align himself with.”
Well said!
Your comment made me wonder what kind of ribbing his daughters are going to take in the future. And, then, I wondered about the last two presidents’ daughters. And, then, and then, I realized something. We need a president who has sons! Think about it. Hmmmmm? Kennedy had one. So did Ronnie. But how far back do we have to go to find one with more?
Don’t give “Princess Dumbass of Wasilla” any ideas. heh…
Ike ?
I thought of his daughters but thought better of bringing them up. They are private exchanges.
But you have to wonder about the man who would accept the unacceptable and do the drone thing more and more. As a father of a daughter, I would be shamed to have been elected only to place mammon on the alter after vigorously brushing aside the higher call for a principled moral stance. He sure worked the dollar side of the equation, the morality not so much.
Oh, heaven forbid. All you really have to know is that George H.W. Bush had 4 and amongst them one former president and one present and future wannabe Prez. I’ve had enough of nepotistic dynasties!
I wasn’t thinking of the dynasty thing. I was wondering about a pattern of behavior amongst men who raise girls instead of boys. Do you know what I mean?
Yes, Obama is so busy turning the pages that he never stops to read even when it is written on the wall.
Why Is Obama Sounding Like A Neocon?
Obama has always sounded (and acted) like a neocon.
“As a candidate for the presidency, I know that I am running to be commander-in-chief — to safeguard this nation’s security.”
“The security and well-being of each and every American depend on the security and well-being of those who live beyond our borders. The mission of the United States is to provide global leadership grounded in the understanding that the world shares a common security and a common humanity.”
“We all owe a special thanks to the many servicemembers who put their lives on hold so that we might live ours here in America. Our prayers are with those who continue to serve in Iraq, Afghanistan and throughout the world to protect our freedom.”
from Obama’s campaign Web site. “Barack Obama supports plans to increase the size of the Army by 65,000 soldiers and the Marines by 27,000 troops. Increasing our end strength will help units retrain and re-equip properly between deployments and decrease the strain on military families.”
“I will end this war in Iraq responsibly, and finish the fight against al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan. I will rebuild our military to meet future conflicts.”
“From traveling throughout Illinois and more recently around the country, I can tell you that Americans are suspicious of labels and suspicious of jargon. They don’t think George Bush is mean-spirited or prejudiced, but have become aware that his administration is irresponsible and often incompetent.”
Upon arriving in the Senate, Sen. Obama supported every funding bill for Iraq, some $300 billion….until he started running for President. [2005 Vote # 117, HR1268, 5/10/05; 2005 Vote # 326, S1042, 11/15/05; 2006 Vote # 112, HR4939, 5/4/06; 2006 Vote # 239; 2006 Vote # 186, S2766, 6/22/06; HR5631, 9/7/06]
“There’s not much of a difference between my position and George Bush’s position [on Iraq] at this stage.” In a meeting with Chicago Tribune reporters at the Democratic National Convention, Obama said, “On Iraq, on paper, there’s not as much difference, I think, between the Bush administration and a Kerry administration as there would have been a year ago. […] There’s not much of a difference between my position and George Bush’s position at this stage. The difference, in my mind, is who’s in a position to execute.” [Chicago Tribune, 07/27/04]
If Obama was a senator in 2002, he would have voted in FAVOR of invading Iraq. He rolled the dice and opposed the war as an Illinois legislator and paid off big for him. But he’s just as conservative as Hillary and the other neoCons.
I think that’s absolutely spot on jimbo. His mentor in the Senate was Joe Lieberman (Ind-Aipac). He gave his speech at the Dem convention in 2004 when Iraq was very unpopular and it paid off big-time. If he was in the Senate like Hillary, Kerry, or Edwards (based upon the political courage he has shown in his Presidency thus far) there is no way he throws a nay vote on the Authorization for Military Force after 9/11.
Oh yes, let’s all support the troops, support the TROOPS, SUPPORT THE TROOPS! And continue to believe that we are not simultaneously supporting THE WAR.
Noam Chomsky calls out this bullshit in “Media Control,” and we ignore it at our peril. The two are indistunguishable and we shouldn’t pretend otherwise. Joining the military is a CHOICE and those who make it are no better than anyone else. The direct correlation between the lip service we pay them and our nation’s proclivity toward international violence is neither coincidental nor justifiable.
WHAT CONSTITUENCY IS OBAMA TRYING TO APPEAL TO?
I’m extremely disappointed that Obama has turned out to be more of an accommodating moderate conservative than a progressive liberal, despite the fact that he is significantly better than Bush was or McCain would have been. I can’t imagine the socio-economic chaos we’d be experiencing if a Republican was in the White House!
My greatest concern is that his playing “bad politics” has needlessly weakened him and the Democratic Party, which confounds me. Republicans are NEVER going to vote for him, so what constituency does he believe he is appealing to by perpetuating many of Bush’s war, military, intelligence, legal and corporatist policies, and retaining many of the people who executed them?
I believe Obama has arrogantly/foolishly alienated the liberals and young voters who got out the vote that got him elected. The Democrats whose efforts got him elected are the Democrats he’s decided to ignore? The dismissal of Shirley Sherrod was a reckless and cowardly “political” decision.
OBAMA, in a FUTILE effort to appease Republicans, is essentially helping Republicans defeat him/Democrats because his base won’t be as enthusiastic to get out the vote for him in 2012 as they were in 2008.
Obama’s critics aren’t alienating liberals and first time voters; Obama is. Why is he doing that? How is that going to help any American let alone Obama or Democrats?
Master of the Electoral Universe, who will remain nameless (rhymes with bomb) thinks this is how to win the hearts and minds of the vaunted ‘independents’
Obama is governing like a Republican because he is a Republican. He’s not appeasing. He’s acting according to his beliefs. He just lies about it a lot. But it is equally important to realize that the Democrats are doing the same thing. They are backing Obama because their core beliefs are also Republican. What we have are two corporate parties. One is called the Republicans. The other should be called the Republicans.
“OBAMA, in a FUTILE effort to appease Republicans, is essentially helping Republicans defeat him/Democrats because his base won’t be as enthusiastic to get out the vote for him in 2012 as they were in 2008.”
I think he’s looking for a way out from his handlers…or he’s a Neocon..
Chris Floyd’s take on it…
http://www.chris-floyd.com/articles/1-latest-news/2016-speech-defect-emissions-of-evil-from-the-oval-office.html
Okay, Poppy Bush. But, he kind of doesn’t count, since I’m convinced that his wife kind of wore the pants in the family. I’m just wondering if a man who raises only daughters develops a certain type of personality of the years. I might be totally full of it. Or, maybe not.
Yep. yep. Maybe if Michelle will get on top he will change his entire attitude. ;-) Ha!
I’ve heard the story of that theory too, but he’s already wrapped around their little fingers.
Maybe, just maybe after the midterms he will get angry and put on his big girl panties! Heck! I don’t know, but until he starts fighting back instead of with them he has lost all confidence from me.
Why did we elect a republican?
Eventually, all Democrats veer towards neo-con-ism. It’s the new fad. All ‘centrist’ Democrats want to sound like war hawks. Hillary ran as a neo-con with all her bellicose statements about Iran. It was only a matter of time before Obama veered in that same direction.
Next thing you know we’ll be bombing Iran, and nearly all the Democrats will be on board, just like they were with the invasion of Iraq.
Obama is a neocon. Haven’t read the comments but I’m sure someone has already pointed that out.
This is the biggest load of BS going. It is the grossest abuse of our soldiers to send them to fight stupid unnecessary wars, and then keep sending them back again and again tour after tour. We can see the strains on them by the high suicide and mental health problem rates among them.
This is a myth. Obama is continuing and expanding Bush’s policies. Bush was hard right wing. So is Obama.
Yes. The republicans support our troops so much they cut VA benefits, slapped the hospitals hand for nasty doings and then marched right on!
Is this a trick question?
I agree with you!
is this a trick question
Obama is a NEODUM I mean NEOCON
ROTFL! Ewwwww. Ya got that XXL black lacey image in my head. Damn you!
No perhaps about it. It is time and long past time to break with the Democrats and move in opposition to them.
I’ve got so many magnetic ribbons on my car, you can’t even tell what color the paint is!
As many others have pointed out, 0bama sounds like a neocon because he is one. An economy based on war needs a constant supply of fresh meat, and when the army is the only job around…
At this point one can only strive towards an alternative to ensure the children do not fall for it. Here in progressive Quebec, the Canadian Navy sets up recruiting stalls inside primary schools where the little ones play with with plastic mock AK-47s and plenty of little flags. Real quaint, I swear.
That’s highly debatable, Charest is a fascist, and the media is aligning itself with american infotainement , Faux news Canada will be owned by Pierre Karl Péladeau, a québécois…
And neocon mimicry buys him nothing:
IOKIYTS (It’s OK If You’re Three Star)
Really? Didn’t he get a look at Walter Reed Army Hospital, the vermin infested wards, chipped paint, and mold throughout the building our wounded veterans returned to? Doesn’t he know that soldiers who developed PTSD were diagnosed with a pre-existing condition so that they could be separated from the service with no disability allowance? Is he aware that nothing is being done about the homeless situation in the veteran community going back to Vietnam-era vets?
Does this little prick have any contact with reality at all?
And is he aware of the latest outrage from Alan Simpson?
“Perhaps, then, 2010 is finally the year for progressives to part ways with the Democrats.”
I’m one step ahead of you Jim, I changed my party affiliation to un-enrolled.
I am now an independent !
Malloy said last night that in this speech, Obama aligned himself completely with Bush and his policies. IMO Obama just flipped the bird to the American people.
More “sacrifices” as long as it’s on the backs of the most vulnerable; all of US under the top 2%.
How much more can we “sacrifice’ without most of us living in our cars or cardboard boxes?
They don’t need the American people anymore, our votes don’t even count and the corporations can find plenty of replacements all over the world.
And I still hear people saying they “don’t pay attention to politics”. Truly amazing. Now wonder these vultures are picking US clean
David Dayen has a fresh cross-post available: New Jobs Bill Proposed
Only a feckless putz like Obama who lacks a core set of values and principles and the guts to stand up for them would fawn over George Bush characterizing his unlawful and unjustifiable invasion of Iraq and the immense amount of death and incalculable human suffering it has caused and continues to cause as successful “nation-building and the spread of democracy” such that “the Iraqi people will be better off because of the U.S. invasion.”
And so Obama continues his relentless and determined fall from grace to become the most hated and reviled man in the world.
Way to go, Obama!
markfromireland – hellllo. were your ears ringing just now ? just linked Gorilla Guides for some singularly clueless Facebook folks
Happy to be of use cbl2 :-) If I may blogwhore a little if people haven´t seen the latest 3 photo essays on our flickr stream they really are worth taking a look at:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27086036@N02/
I especially like this photo:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27086036@N02/4930271302/#/
“Perhaps, then, 2010 is finally the year for progressives to part ways with the Democrats.”
Why is it always about our impending disaffection? True progressives parted ways with Obama and the Democrats a long time ago.
Yep, the push by most self-described progressives to pass the Senate HCR package in exchange for absolutely NOTHING certainly illustrated how few true progressives exist.
They keep rewarding bad behavior by elected Democrats and are shocked, SHOCKED, when it results in more bad behavior. It is like giving your dog a treat every time he craps on the carpet in an effort to train him to go outdoors.
Jane has a call to action over at FDL. Since I’ve been unemployed for almost 2 years, I can’t do this one. But I sure can yell about it! Help out if you can.
New Bush, same as the old Bush! What a total disappoinment this president has become.
Others, including me, heard this speech differently.
Here is, in part, what Kevin Drum heard:
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2010/08/obamas-speech
So, I guess, what you hear depends, in part, on the narrative you bring with you to the speech.
Wow. Either you need to get your hearing checked or you’re hearing things.
I do think it is time for progressives to jettison the Democratic Party. Occasionally, when a structure is no longer sound (imagine a home infested with termites), no amount of attempts at structural repair can save the structure; it has to either be torn down completely and rebuilt entirely from the ground up, or the former residents must move into new digs. We’ve reached that point with the Democratic Party. The Congresspeople, would-be Congresspersons, and the President, as well as essentially his entire Cabinet, are hopelessly corrupted by their complete reliance on corporate cash. This will only get worse–much worse–now that Citizens United has opened the floodgates for real. I do not think we have the power to tear down the corrupt Corporate-sucking Democratic Party, which leaves only the other alternative.
We are no longer welcome, nor wanted, in the Democratic Party. And quite frankly, the Democratic Party is no longer welcome or wanted in my camp, either. Time to find/build a brand new home.
I agree. At the national level the Democratic Party is completely beyond redemption. All they have at this point is the fear card, “We will screw you at every opportunity but vote for us anyway because the SCARY Republicans will screw you even worse.”
I’m conflicted though, because on the local level the Dems here are the best candidates available. I have no confidence that if they rose to higher levels of government they would not also be corrupted but most don’t seek higher office, they simply want to serve the community to the best of their ability. For the time being I will continue to vote for them.
No – we failed to be responsible, and now face the results of our irresponsibility.
That is why we elected Obama and the Democratic Party. It would be nice to hear him acknowledge it.
What evidence can you produce to support the idea that Obama is not a Neocon?
I think what is essential here is the difference between the statement that “greater democracy for Iraq is a good thing” and “Iraqis are better off for the war we started”.
Most Democrats were able to point out, at least after it became ‘safe’-by-polling in 2005, that conflating these two statements was one of the duplicitous methods by which the American people were led to war in the first place: it’s quite a different thing to endorse democracy as a system than it is to endorse American occupation of Iraq as a method. And the method turned out to be injurious as a whole to Iraq in ways both measurable (brain drain, refugee crisis, dismantling Iraq’s well-developed administrative state, and millions of dead) as well as immeasurable. Is it better that the vote means something there now? Yes. Does that mean the war or our prosecution of it was responsible or even a moral good? No.
Unfortunately, as soon as the Democrats were placed in charge of the war, this became nit-picking to a lot of White House supporters. My main problem with Obama’s speech is that he repeats anti-war arguments and then moves ahead to conflate these two, in the exact same way we’ve heard for years, and while we’re supposedly on our way out. It’s as though the administration believes that to save face, America can’t even admit to learning anything from the last seven years.
While perhaps secondary to the human losses, I think it is important to keep pointing out that U.S. national security never justified the monetary expense of invasion and occupation. The expense of containing Saddam was roughly $10 billion per year. It seemed like a lot at the time but in retrospect was good value for money spent.
Well, I have to be the guy who points out that our policy of ‘containing’ Saddam also killed a great number of innocent Iraqis while enriching the most devious and unscrupulous Republicans in America. I’m a skeptic of the ‘blood-for-oil’ theory of why we invaded in 2003; I think that what we saw was the screw-up of identifiable ideologues who were absolutely convinced that they could lop off the head of the Iraqi government, clean out the Baathists, put a skeleton crew in place over the whole thing with the backing of exiles, and depend on a previously secular culture and the lure of Western dollars to keep things steady in the face of simmering post-colonial divisions.
However, the sanctions program was, without a doubt, American-backed trade in Iraqi blood for Iraqi oil. It’s one of the reasons I don’t buy ‘blood-for-oil’ as the reason why we invaded – because if that was the aim, the government could have just bought more oil, enriched the Republican party, and made sure none of the blood was American. All the stuff about how Saddam was actually arrayed against Wahabbist fanatics like al-Qaeda would have become Republican propaganda for the success of their policy in Afghanistan, a la Qaddafi and the Palestinian elections in that brief period of Bush Doctrine fantasy when these were actually held up by Republicans as retroactive justification of the invasion of Iraq.
Maybe they have dirty pictures of him having sex a with a dead boy. It doesn’t matter why in the end. We know how he acts.
I doubt that (re: the pictures) but the fact is that the actions of our leaders invariably result in the violent death of countless innocents. How the fuck do they convince themselves and much of the public that it serves some greater good? Is it even possible that we could have a government which is not comprised of sociopaths?
Wow, I didn’t realize Bob Cesca was such an Obot:
http://www.bobcesca.com/blog-archives/2010/09/history_will_re_1.html
Yikes! My comment got really screwed up, and it is too late to edit it – sorry… :( Never mind.
Obama made the speech as the Commander in Chief …and… as a Democratic President. However, it is correct to point out that Bush needs no “thank you’s” for either the “war or the economy”. I did not get that gratitude crap either. On the other hand, its another notch in this guys knife handle that democrats “should” be using to fight off those “right wing whackjobs” in Congress tellin lies sayin this administration/congress is doing nothing. As a vet, I am glad we are finally starting to shut this one down. Bless our President !
Drift to the center-right? Since when has Obama turned left from his hard right position? He’d have to travel back left several fucking light years to get to center-right. Obama makes Cheney look like a progressive, for Chrissakes.
Many have already commented on this, but ORahma really lost me with all of his toadying up to Bush the dumber. Sheesh! Spare me that crap. That did it for me: pretty much stopped listening after that.
Anyone who lauds W for being ever so “patriotic” and “supporting the troops” needs his head examined. Bush willfully chose to ignore the ample evidence that a 9/11 style of attack was immanent. Bush pulled the Special Ops back from the Tora Bora Hills in Afghanistan when they got too close to almost capturing Bush’s BFF Osama bin Laden. And Bush LIED about WMD in Iraq to gin up an ersatz “reason” for why we had to go to war with Iraq to “keep the USA safe.”
Patriotic? Pah-leeeeeze. Don’t make me puke.
Yet more crystal clear evidence that BHO is only living out the third term of Bush the dumber. Thanks for nothing, Barackstar.
This is carrying fairness into realms never before envisioned for the concept of fairness. This is the “fairness” that can find the merit in the attack-Iraqers’ patriotism. As I understand it, there are a few US military personnel and contractors left in Iraq. Did they send all their guns and bombs and the wings and rotors of their aircraft out with all the combat troops who were withdrawn? Is the author still clutching so desperately at the image of the Obama that he voted for that he can’t yet ackowledge the Obama that he got?
I missed the very beginning of Obama’s speech last night… and was extremely disappointed with the rest of it.
He should change parties and run as a Republican. At least then we’d know what we’re up against.
And just maybe… we’d be able to draft someone else to run as the Democrat.
I think it’s time for Obama to be bold and switch parties. With Palin, Romney, and Pawlenty moving right, he could outflank them on the center, and capture the GOP nomination. He would be right at home, and progressives could reclaim the Democratic party. The only losers would be the wingnuts.
I’m probably the biggest liberal who’s criticizing the Democrats and Obama right now. And while I DO think it is time we start beating the drum to start our own party, in the next two months we need to pull back from the self-flagellation of our party and start telling everyone they need to go to the polls in November and hold our noses and vote for the Democrats. Why? Because the REPUBLICANS ARE FAR, FAR WORSE!
Remember: They want to:
–Go to war with Iran! (Thing things are bad now, wait until we start World War III.)
–Continued corporate welfare for the oil industry and absolutely NO progress to solve the global climate change problems.
–Privatize Social Security and Medicare, phase it out completely, and impose deep cuts on the current generation on Social Security. .
–Make the Bush tax-cuts permanent. And you know they won’t add extra tax cuts for the middle class in there, either.
–Repeal the health care bill.
–Kangaroo courts to prosecute Obama and the Democrats for God Knows What!
–Human rights, especially those for homosexuals, will move BACKWARD. Expect a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. Not only will “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” be off the table, they will probably move to change the law back to the days when someone could be put in the brig for being gay.
–Ban abortion. A vote for a Republican is one vote closer to forcing women to have their rapist’s babies.
AFTER the election, we can start flogging the Democrats again and campaigning the Progressives in the party to leave it and start a new party! But we can’t let the Republicans win back power because it will be catastrophic!