Wednesday, March 18, 2009

Obama Transformative? Not Quite

GW Bush was such a stupendous failure, that almost any non-Republican president who followed him could be called transformative. The fact that Obama was a mulatto, a mixed race president, had many leap to the conclusion that he would be transformative because of his color. So far he has given little transformation; on the contrary, he reflects status quo. If the good times were rolling that political condition would be welcomed, but times are bad economically and politically, especially internationally. So the magic word is CHANGE, hopefully for the better.

Obama has not been innovative yet on social schemes. As a matter of fact, except on merit pay for teachers he goes along with the Democratic Party's nostrums on education, his welfare policy remains firm, he keeps raising the net on unemployment and makes earnest noises on national healthcare. He has yet to pamper the gay community.

His Attorney General Holder, also of mixed race, got over enthused on race issues and scolded the white Americans because they do not socially entertain sufficient number of black people. This was Holder's first major speech since his confirmation. Obama, embarrassed, quickly squelched Holder's speech; otherwise the speech might have been used by the Klan to spark THE REBIRTH OF A NATION. I am not certain where Obama finds his appointees. Lucky for the Nation, OJ’s Johnnie Cochran was not around or might have appointed him for the job.

The President’s economic team is composed of the same losers who participated in the economic debacle. If you do not think they are still soul mates of big business and Wall Street watch how they tolerate the plunder of TARP funds for executive bonuses. Poor things claim they cannot do anything about it. Do not believe them – they can claw back every cent if there was motivation. And Obama is our elected motivator.

Not only do we have the same ineptitude managing our economic heights, but our military establishment is still run by the same people who could not catch or kill bin Laden or stabilize Iraq enough so we can end the occupation – in both the economic and military cases, these people have a vested interest in failure. The US military chiefs now appear to be fighting to remain in Iraq. Where is Obama's leadership?

Strategic and tactical intelligence still remains key to diplomatic success and military victory. Obama’s pick to head CIA, Leon Panetta was so lame that it smacked of a gong show choice. Panetta has never collected and analyzed raw information, disseminated intelligence or run high risk black operations. He has read classified info when in the White House and in Congress – that is all – his main concern is political. HOW CAN WE PROTECT THE PRESIDENT ON THIS ONE? We had that nonsense from the CIA for the last 8 years under GW Bush and it is a major reason we are losing two wars. Is Obama looking for plausible denial? IF so, Panetta better find him an Ahmed Chalibi fast.

Perhaps the biggest indication most recently to deflate hope that Obama would be transformative came as almost a side-show issue. With the advent of 9/11 Bush and Congress thought they could reassure the American public that a surprise attack could be averted by more bureaucratic intelligence organization, so a new level of National level intelligence was created to over see the intelligence community.

In the case of Iraq, it was never a question of poor organization, just weak-willed intelligence directors who were afraid to not be team player by opposing the White House march to war. On 9/11, Bush did receive warning and chose to ignore it. No organizational structure apparently can overcome the bureaucratic axiom, IGNORE THE PROBLEM UNLESS YOU HAVE A SOLUTION and that is what GW Bush did on 9/11.

Under this post 9/11 regime, Obama appointed Ambassador Charles W Freeman Jr. as Chairman of the National Intelligence Council. Freeman dutifully shed his commercial ties with China and Saudi Arabia to take the job; he is exceptionally qualified both as a China hand and Mideast expert. He was Nixon's interpreter in China and former ambassador to Saudi Arabia. He had the support of 17 former US ambassadors for the job. Freeman is not a Jew.

The Likud Right Wing Jewish lobby lead by Israel/America Senators Leiberman and Schumer, in a play to Israeli/American Emanuel, Obama's chief of staff, forced Freeman to withdraw. Freeman went public with his disgust on CNN last Sunday. He in no uncertain terms attacked the insidious influence of the Israeli Lobby in the US.

My conclusion is that since the Israeli American Jews could not control Freeman, they destroyed him. Likud American Jews are still smarting over American National Intelligence estimates that do not consider Iran as great a threat as do sky-is-falling, fanatic Israelis.

Obama watched silently as this Freeman saga unfolded. During the process, he lost a patriot in Freeman who had the fortitude to hew to the truth. Instead, he will get a toady to American Israeli policy. The corrosive Israeli lobby beat goes on. Obama has no claim so far as being transformative. Just because he is black will not hack it. He has not one scintilla of Scipio Africanus or Toussaint l'Overture. As he weakly burrows into status quo, he has to be careful or he will go down as Uncle Tom. Colonel Robert E Bartos USA


Anonymous stats said...

If you were "shocked, shocked I tell you," by Obama's betrayal of those who "voted" him into office, then you haven't really been paying attention.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home