Tag Archives: Election/Politicians

Obama, Iran, and more of the same

“I must admit that, like most progressives and antiwar activists in the coalition that played a crucial role in the victory of President-elect Barack Obama, I have been greatly disappointed with his national security team (NST). Gone are all the hopeful signs of real change in the American foreign policy that we saw – as it now appears self-deludedly – coming with the election of Obama. Instead, we must confront the cold – but by now very familiar – reality that the main players in U.S. foreign policy for several years to come will be people we have disagreed with very strongly, even despised, over the years.

There is not even one progressive or antiwar voice with principled positions in Obama’s NST to counter all the pro-war people he has picked, even though when introducing his NST, Obama declared that he believes in having “strong personalities and strong opinions” and that he will welcome ‘vigorous debate inside the White House.’

I don’t want to rehash all the praise that Obama has been receiving for the selection of his NST from the neoconservatives and the War Party, which is a glaring sign of how terrible his NST is. Many people, including the author, have already done that. It should suffice to say that the neocons and the War Party could not have been happier with Obama’s NST. The turncoat Joe Lieberman, whose sole purpose in life seems to be starting a war with Iran, called Obama’s selections ‘virtually perfect,’ and Michael Goldfarb of the Weekly Standard declared that the selections indicate “surprising continuity on foreign policy between President Bush’s second term and the incoming administration. . . . The expectation is that Obama is set to continue the course set by Bush. . . .”

. . . .

In the Democratic debate in Philadelphia on April 16, 2008, [Obama] said,

‘I have said I will do whatever is required to prevent the Iranians from obtaining nuclear weapons. I believe that includes direct talks with the Iranians where we are laying out very clearly for them, here are the issues that we find unacceptable. . . . Now, my belief is that they should also know that I will take no options off the table when it comes to preventing them from using nuclear weapons. . . .’

Those are weapons that Iran does not have, and there is no evidence that it is attempting to get them.

In an interview on ABC’s Good Morning America on April 22, 2008, Obama said, ‘We shouldn’t allow Iran to have nuclear weapons, period. I have consistently said that I will do everything in my power to prevent them from having it, and I have not ruled out military force as an option.'” (Read more from antiwar.com)

Question: Can we create cult of personality to gain support of all the policies begun under our reviled President Bush?
Answer: YES WE CAN!

Obama left with little time to curb global warming

By SETH BORENSTEIN, AP Science Writer Seth Borenstein, Ap Science Writer – Sun Dec 14, 6:49 pm ET

WASHINGTON – When Bill Clinton took office in 1993, global warming was a slow-moving environmental problem that was easy to ignore. Now it is a ticking time bomb that President-elect Barack Obama can’t avoid. (from news.yahoo.com)

***

“I am a skeptic. . . Global warming has become a new religion.” – Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever.

Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history. . . When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” – UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist.

“The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds. . . I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists,” – Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet.

“Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense. . . The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.” – Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles.

See this earlier post for more.

Protecting Torture

“After urging Bush to fight the incoming administration’s desire to close Guantanamo, [neo-con chicken-hawk William] Kristol concludes with this:

‘One last thing: Bush should consider pardoning–and should at least be vociferously praising–everyone who served in good faith in the war on terror. . . . The CIA agents who waterboarded Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, and the NSA officials who listened in on phone calls from Pakistan, should not have to worry about legal bills or public defamation. In fact, Bush might want to give some of these public servants the Medal of Freedom at the same time he bestows the honor on Generals Petraeus and Odierno. They deserve it.’

In the Bush era, the Medal of Freedom has come to absurdly represent a reward for those who carried out policy failures at the urging of the Bush administration. By this standard, the implementers of torture and warrantless wiretapping certainly qualify for such a medal. ” (Read more from thinkprogress.org)

“Rep. Reyes: Since Torture Might Be Necessary, Obama Should Keep Torture Apologists Hayden, McConnell Reyes dismissed concerns over Hayden and McConnell’s records as apologists for torture. He insisted that that ‘there are some options that need to be available’ to interrogators — presumably beyond the Army Field Manuel — to get the best information:

Regarding the CIA’s alternative interrogation program, Reyes indicated that his recommendations concerned finding a balance so the agency does not use torture but can get valuable information from suspected terrorists or other detainees.

‘There are those that believe that this particular issue has to be dealt with very carefully because there are beliefs that there are some options that need to be available,’ Reyes said.” (Read more from prisonplanet.com)

Obama

Obama’s Long List Of Promises To Keep, Obligations To Meet
“Faced with economic collapse on the home-front and two wars overseas, the administration of President-elect Barack Obama is signaling loudly and clearly that a substantial number of his costly campaign promises will have to be postponed or abandoned altogether.”

Huffington post assembled a great, cited list of Obama’s many promises: Improve options for displaced workers / Help community and small business development agencies / Improve rural schools and availability of doctors / Help organic farmers and promote regional food systems / Give new farmers tax incentives / Provide farmers capital and help rural small businesses / Create rural revitalization program / Improve high school graduation rates / Double the number of high school students taking college level courses / Double charter school funding / Include more technology in public schools / Provide tuition assistance to students who perform community service / Recruit teachers and principals / Recruit science and technology teachers / Provide pay raises for teachers and principals / Pay tuition for students going into teaching / Increase Head Start and Early Start / etc. (Read more from huffingtonpost.com)

Me: Normally, I call politicians on broken promises, but not with these. Let’s hope Obama doesn’t keep these promises for a few reasons: 1) none of the federal government’s business 2) we can’t afford any more government programs 3) they’d further warp our already mutilated economy. If you want to help, say, a rural community, let the people, the communities, the states keep more of their own money. The central planners in Washington don’t know how to most efficiently spend money, the people do.

There are a few promises I’d like to see him keep: Ending the Iraq War, Tax cuts for the poor, Repealing the Patriot Act. Am I hopeful? Hell no. Obama is a new face on the same old policies.

—

Obama Doesn’t Plan to End the Iraq Occupation
“The New York Times is reporting about an "apparent evolution" in president-elect Barack Obama’s thinking on Iraq, citing his recent statements about his plan to keep a "residual force" in the country and his pledge to "listen to the recommendations of my commanders" as Obama prepares to assume actual command of US forces. "At the Pentagon and the military headquarters in Iraq, the response to the statements this week from Mr. Obama and his national security team has been akin to the senior officer corps’ letting out its collective breath," the Times reported. "[T]the words sounded to them like the new president would take a measured approach on the question of troop levels."

The reality is there is no "evolution."

Anyone who took the time to cut past Barack Obama’s campaign rhetoric of "change" and bringing an "end" to the Iraq war realized early on that the now-president-elect had a plan that boiled down to a down-sizing and rebranding of the occupation. While he emphasized his pledge to withdraw US "combat forces" from Iraq in 16 months (which may or may not happen), he has always said that he intends to keep "residual forces" in place for the foreseeable future.

It’s an interesting choice of terms. "Residual"” (Read more from antiwar.com)

Me: Can we create a cult of personality in support of the same policies that Bush pursued? Yes we can!

—

What Change? by Chuck Baldwin, 2008 Constitution Party Presidential Candidate
“Obama excelled in delivering the message of change. So, what kind of change will Obama actually deliver?” (Read more from newswithviews.com)

—

Palestinians say nothing will change under Obama
“Most Palestinians think the election of Barack Obama as US president will have no impact on the chances of a solution to the conflict with Israel, an opinion poll published on Wednesday said. It found that 57.5% of those Palestinians who were questioned thought that Obama’s election ‘will make no difference.'” (Read more from ynetnews.com)

Peres: Obama told me he was ‘very impressed’ with Arab peace plan

“LONDON – U.S. President-elect Barack Obama proclaimed himself ‘very impressed’ with the Arab League’s peace plan when he discussed it with President Shimon Peres during a brief visit to Israel four months ago, Peres said Tuesday.

Peres, who had just arrived in London for an official visit, made the comment in interviews to be published in the British media. He was responding to questions about whether he thought Obama would advance the Middle East peace process in general and the Arab League’s plan in particular.

But he denied a Sunday Times report earlier this week which claimed that Obama had said Israel would be “crazy” to reject the Arab initiative.

On Monday, former American envoy to the Middle East Dennis Ross, who has been advising Obama on the subject, also denied reports that Obama had said while visiting Israel in July that he supported the Arab initiative and would base his own diplomatic policy on it.

The plan, originally proposed by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia in 2002 and later adopted by the Arab League, states that Israel would receive full relations with the entire Arab world in exchange for a full withdrawal from all the territory it captured in 1967, including East Jerusalem, plus a solution to the refugee problem. The Bush Administration has said it views the plan positively, but its own road map peace plan and the understandings reached at last year’s Annapolis summit have served as the basis of its diplomatic program.” (Read more from Haaretz.com)

I predict AIPAC will mobilize monstrous opposition to any hint of support for the Arab peace plan in our government or media. They will try to kill it the same way they killed Bush’s much more modest “Road Map.”

Report: US Asked Israel Not to Start Any Major Wars Until Obama Takes Office

from antiwar.com:

Amid several bellicose comments about the possibility of an impending Israeli strike against Iran Israeli Defense Ministry officials say they have been contacted by US officials who have asked them to refrain from launching any attacks against Iran until after President-elect Barack Obama takes office in January. Likewise, the officials reportedly have cautioned Israel not to launch its long-reported ground invasion of the Gaza Strip until after the inauguration.

An Israeli attack on Iran would almost certainly be interpreted as an American attack, and would likely spark a broad war between Iran and the United States. That prospect, with less than two months before the administration change and President Bush keeping a close eye on his legacy, seems unappealing.

The Israeli military insists that, despite reports to the contrary, it has no intentions of launching a ground invasion of the Gaza Strip any time soon. On the other hand Israel’s elections are scheduled for early February, and with the hawkish opposition Likud Party leading in the polls the outgoing government might gamble on its ability to reap political advantage from a dramatic move on one or both fronts.

Obama’s Hawks – more of the same

Antiwar groups fear Barack Obama may create hawkish Cabinet

Activists note that most of the candidates for top security posts voted for the 2002 resolution authorizing President Bush to invade Iraq or otherwise supported launching the war.

Reporting from Washington — Antiwar groups and other liberal activists are increasingly concerned at signs that Barack Obama’s national security team will be dominated by appointees who favored the Iraq invasion and hold hawkish views on other important foreign policy issues.

“It’s astonishing that not one of the 23 senators or 133 House members who voted against the war is in the mix,” said Sam Husseini of the liberal group Institute for Public Accuracy.

Clinton, who was Obama’s chief opponent during the Democratic presidential primaries, appears to be the top candidate for secretary of State in his administration. Speculation about Clinton has dismayed some liberal activists but has cheered some conservatives such as former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger and editor William Kristol of the Weekly Standard.

Clinton voted in favor of the Iraq war resolution, and despite pressure, she never said during the primary campaign that she regretted that vote. She also favored legislation last year to support the designation of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps as a terrorist organization, another decision that pleased conservatives. (Read more from LATimes.com)

There is no “left” opposing the “right.” It is power vs. freedom, and both parties have come to represent power. Resist.

This is an early indication, that the prophet, Ron Paul was right again: Obama = more of the same.

Question: Can we create cult of personality who’ll allow the privileged criminals who run this country to continue frittering away American lives and American wealth in pursuit of empire?

Answer: YES WE CAN!!!!!!

New ‘pro-Israel, pro-peace’ lobby J Street hopes for Obama-era growth

WASHINGTON – Will the “Obama effect” that enabled Democratic candidates to ride the party’s presidential candidate into Congress also contribute toward changing the map of Jewish influence on Capitol Hill? J Street, the “pro-Israel, pro-peace” lobbying group and Political Action Committee (PAC) formed just last April and seen as the left’s answer to the veteran American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), is counting on it.

Though only about six months old, J Street already managed to raise $570,000 for 41 Congressional candidates, most of them Democrats. Six of them lost their races, and three are still awaiting the final results. (Read More from Haaretz.com)