hard truths

I need to come clean on what I think about Obama's Notre Dame speech:

It is his best.

Including the 2004 convention speech and all those "best speech ever" moments last year - the Wright talk, the convention acceptance and the wildly overrated and forgettable inauguration speech. It had two elements always missing from his mountain top sermons: True bravery and real, cold truth. On one issue, abortion, Obama said in no uncertain terms that there are irreconcilable differences. There are elements on which both sides will not ever be able agree, so we must work in those areas in which we can find some common ground. This is hard stuff. But it is the stuff of real leadership. No bromides about bipartisanship and nonsensical, dishonest hooey about "change."

I may well be a sore loser (but being sore is fine. I'm also right.). I am almost certain that Hillary Clinton could have and would have told us the hard truths on all things. (And when I say "all things" I mostly mean the fix we are in economically.) The right man for the job was THAT woman - with her brass balls and husband in the background playing the good cop. I am not sure Obama can stomach telling us too many hard truths. Evidence so far indicates he cannot.

As much as I distrust the man now, if he can muster the will to tell us the hard truths on issues other than abortion as his term progresses he will become a President I admire and respect even if I disagree. For now we are stuck watching the same foolishness as before unfolding with a new face. I still find it remarkable that so many did not see this coming. It was obvious well over a year ago. With the limited knowledge I have it remains clear to me - clearer now, actually, that he is working to save a system that is unsave-able and shouldn't be saved even if it was. The element that bothers me the most is that his "movement" absorbed the opposition. Or rather, they absorbed themselves. It amused and pained me to see so many "progressives" joyfully dance to a tune orchestrated by George Soros and Goldman Sachs. Some of them now stunned to be coming to with a President printing money for bankers and imitating Bush on civil liberties.

In his career Obama has used his considerable skills as a speaker to one end - to promote himself. If he decides to use his gift as a speaker to actually lead, historians may look back on the Notre Dame speech as a turning point.

Misoverestimating Obama

The release of the torture memos is proving to be a fine example in narcissistic personality disorder causing havoc. I repeat myself AGAIN on this point: There were two choices before Obama last week. Both had merit.

1. Do not release the memos. State without equivocation that they will remain classified and he will fight any attempts to declassify. Further state that the U.S. abides by international standards and laws now with all its prisoners. Move on.

2. Release the memos. Take responsibility for the uproar that would follow. State without equivocation that America must comes to terms with terrorists, and how to deal with them, and he would follow the law wherever it lead, including holding people responsible if they broke it.

Obama did neither.

I have no doubt that he felt he needed to be "loved" by his base and therefore released the documents to prove something. But he knew he did not have the stomach to man up and let things play out legally. The Justice Department - or at least some in it - think otherwise.

From the Daily Beast:
that senior Justice Department lawyers were "incensed" at the Emanuel and Gibbs statements, as one put it-not because they disagreed with Obama's apparent opposition to an investigation and prosecution, but because the statements violated well-established rules separating political figures in the White House from decisions about active criminal cases.

Punting is the Obama way. This unfortunate habit is in evidence through out his first 100 days. He seems unable to retain clarity of vision on anything of importance. He, in effect, punted on the memos, trying to please everyone and pleasing no one. The banking plan refuses to nationalize rotten banks but, in effect, does so by making the taxpayer the owners - though, since he won't nationalize, we have little say in what the banks do with our money. He most certainly punted on the stimulus bill, the result being a hodge podge mess.

"Punting" plays out differently in the foreign sphere. He punts by apologizing at every turn. Again - this is an indicator that he thinks being personally liked is more important than a coherent policy. "We're sorry about W, please like me" does not make for a foreign policy anyone can respect.

It is interesting how thoroughly his aura has been shredded in 100 days. Congress appears to be the lead branch of government now - a few short months after his "historic" election to head the executive branch. No doubt Congress will be the captain of the torture memo ship going forward. He has caused resentments galore with the CIA, and now, his Justice Department.

People need to understand that this comes from a fundamental lack of Executive skill. And this lack of skill comes from having things handed to him through out his life and having others do the heavy lifting. The gravity and the blowback potential of releasing the memos seems not to have occurred to him. I have no doubt that he convinced himself of the righteousness of his muddled stance and assumed everyone else would go along.

It is hard to imagine a President McCain or Hillary Clinton misunderestimating the potential problems. The reason? One word: experience.

Female Leaders.

Below is a list of nations that have had either female Presidents or female Prime Minsters since WW2. A number (Bangladesh, New Zealand) have had more than one female leader.

(I do not include on this list "head of state". Queen Elizabeth is the head of state of 16 countries with a total population of 130 million and a land mass that is still enormous by any standard, including the continent of Australia and half of North America. Further she is the titular head of the Commonwealth which includes another billion souls. Ceremonial or not the lady has unbelievable power - but, alas, she hardly earned it.)

I wonder what my point could be with this list? Just pointing in a direction and saying "look at this, isn't this interesting..." It is thought provoking to see where women have risen to the top - sometimes well before women were even considered remotely viable for the top post here.

and it is a bit depressing to think Moldova has head a female Pres... and we have not....


Sri Lanka
India
Israel
Argentina
Central African Republic
Great Britain
Portugal
Bolivia
Dominica
Iceland
Norway
Yugoslavia
Malta
Netherlands Antilles
Guinea Bissau
Philippines
Pakistan
Lithuania
Nicaragua
Ireland
Haiti
German Democratic Republic
Bangladesh
France
Poland
Canada
Burundi
Rwanda
Turkey
Bulgaria
Bermuda
Guyana
New Zealand
Switzerland
Mongolia
Panama
Latvia
Finland
Senegal
Indonesia
Sao Tome and Principe
Peru
Mozambique
Germany
Ukraine
Chile
Liberia
South Korea
Jamaica
Federation of Bosnia and Herzogovina
Moldova

Going forward

In this little corner of the Internets the watchword is WATCH. Closely. As I've said already, I have no faith or hope in the man who is now President and this is a good thing. My expectations can be easily met, and, I suspect, will be. Some already have been met. That inauguration thingy was too pricey but did seem nice. The speech was okay.

If Obama turns out to be a truly transformative leader I benefit, you benefit, we all do. Win/Win.

Along the way, those of us who refused to "get on the Obama bus" now have the obligation to see as clearly as possible, to own what we already know. The man did not emerge from the ether yesterday. He got where he is with brutal tactics and calculating deceits. Not exactly new, but he did raise the bar. Aspects of these characteristics may benefit him as he deals with Pelosi and that lot.

For anyone who feels the need to "give him a chance" I support that. I don't feel this need. I want proof.

He's failed the trust test 1000 times over the past year. At every single moment when integrity was called for Obama chose duplicity. The Wright speech was as close as he came to showing some integrity. But then he ditched the old grump a week later anyway.

I won't be shaking the etch-a-sketch simply because he was sworn in. Real liberals don't do blind allegiance.

One of the reasons pro Clinton blogs were a treat and relief all year was because they supported and defended her while never letting her off the hook. I knew I disagreed with Clinton's war votes. The Obama pods knew he fudged his Iraq stance every 3 months and decided not to take in the information and deal with it - but instead to lie and pretend reality was, in fact, not reality.

The Obama Blogs and Media Machine attacked Clinton and ignored Obama's reality. They often slipped into moral depravity. Kos allowed - it seems encouraged - death threats against the Clintons, incitements to rape, and all manner of other vulgarity. Huffington was a caldron of blind hatred and shiny delusion. Avorisis sold his soul. Andrew Sullivan tried to - but came to find he does not have one. Poor Andy. Olbermann made a joke about killing Clinton.

Ha. ha.

The trolls who got off on alighting at those places, punking the Clintons, and working into dithers of Obama rapture are in for rough sledding. He's not what was sold. What he actually is is still open to question. And it may not be so bad. What he will be to many is disappointing. Most Pods began frantically making excuses the day after the election. In those pockets of the Left where integrity, principles, and consistency still matter the Obama party has long since dispersed.

Though this blog and many bigger ones directed fury at the Obama charade - lines where drawn in the sand. Anger was in full bloom. The murderous fantasies of spoiled children were not.

BHO does not fit any of the usual labels. Though this may sound appealing and revolutionary about now- it is not. Core principles matter. I have no idea what his are, or if he has any. Liberal and conservative are nouns. Moderate is a verb. To say Obama is moderate is to imply an action or way of being. It is not a statement of core beliefs.

Splitting the difference is not a core principle. It is a tactic. The Carter, Bush 1, and Clinton presidencies all suffered when a lack of core principles was exposed or principles were betrayed. Bush 2 believed in a thing or two along the way - but his anti-curious shallow personality resulted in an ossifying stupidity as the first years of the Iraq war and Katrina proved.

If President Obama demonstrates leadership skills and integrity, takes intelligent action, and proves he belongs where he now is - I will applaud. The campaign and transition proved that he was shrewd and supported by many. Nothing else. As far has I can tell, even after the speech yesterday, is that he believes in "unity". Before November he believed in "hope".

Yeah, well. Who doesn't?

The bar is so high for me, and my expectations so low, precisely because I watched closely all year. So far, all he brings to the party are slogans, speeches about unity, and, since winning, a congenital compulsion to split the difference in all fights. Oh, and a lot of very powerful folks behind the scenes who do have expectations.

Investments are like that. One expects a return.

Riverdaughter on leadership

The word "leadership" has been kicked around a lot by the Obama squad this year. Like "change" it has been rendered almost meaningless. In the case of "leadership" I don't blame Obama for neutering the meaning. For years the most duplicitous politicians have debased the meaning. The Cheney/Bush version of the word meant "We are doing it my way or else." Which, since he often got his way in the first term, was a form of leadership.

Leaders aren't always inclusive. But great ones are. The Obama usage of the word "leader" is odder and more restrictive than even Bush's- if that's possible. The Obama vision of "leadership" is entirely about one person - himself. He's lead expertly on promoting a visceral idea called "Obama". Which is not an idea at all. For the life of me I can't think of a single issue he's lead on. I won't belabor this point because Riveraughter has a terrific post on the topic today.
I refused to vote for Barack Obama because I knew he came up empty on the capacity for moral leadership.

This sentence is surprisingly true. The Obama cult's meme now is that he is reaching past old divisions. But he is not. He's attempting to paper over them, apparently believing the force of his personality will render the most wrenching social issues mute. It won't.

Obama is increasingly in danger of becoming the anti-Truman. Truman, via executive order, ended segregation in the armed forces in 1948 - the summer before he was to stand for election. That was, as they say , ballsy. The Southern delegates walked out of the Democratic convention.

Obama has failed the leadership test on all major fronts so far: FISA, Public financing, the rampant sexism in the campaign. On FISA and public financing he issued the lamest excuses imaginable for his flip flops. They were laughable. On the sexism, apparent to all thinking people through out the year, he remained all but mute, signalling assent in some cases.

Presidents do not have to be moral leaders. But the great ones are. Once again, the difference between the Obama myth and the real world Obama is enormous.

So far.

Riverdaughter rightly implies that Obama is already hard at work on his re-election, leading the way on his favorite cause - himself.

It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine.

For all the teeth gnashing and hair puling this past week - the Dow ended exactly 0.3% lower than last Friday - and the NASDAQ ENDED UP for the week. Huh... to read some news stories - you'd think we were all living on expired cans of creme corn...

Anyone close to me knows I am a doomster. Or have been until recently. I love nearly all "the end is nigh" theories. I like poking at them to see if they add up on any level...physical, spiritual, etc...

From Global Warming - mostly true -

to Peak Oil - mostly true -

to the Mayan Calenders ending the world on 12/21/12- mostly bullshit with almost no basis in actual Mayan time keeping , but it does make for good history channel filler and gives overfed first world lost souls a sense that they are "connecting" to something "deeper".

(If these bratty boomers would just discreetly help serve a meal at a soup kitchen once a week they would not need to paper over this gap in their psyche which projects outward into racist and condescending false deification of indigenous people.)

Take that New Agers! Stop reading "The Secret" and put on your damn work gloves!

Revelation: ugh. The book is so transparently about the Roman Empire of the time I can't bare to listen to any nonsense about it any more from morons who refuse to see this simple truth.

... The anti-Christ will ride a white horse named Trigger. Gog and Magog will have a fight with Mayor McCheese somewhere in Syria....blah blah blah...

A few more doomsters are fun: Nostradamus, the world's first Sylvia Brown, seems to have predicted everything that would ever happen but in a manner that makes no sense at all. I once found a Nostradamus prediction that I am sure foretold that I would get a corn on my right foot.

when the 2nd slogger (blogger)
has walked through Asia minor (koreatown)
he will come to the green patch
where cake met the rain and was left out (MacArthur Park)
It is here that the horns of the feet will be felt.

Once again, Nostradamus was correct!

Lest you think me a brat - I believe in psychic phenomenon and the ability of some to predict potential futures. But I believe in freewill much, much more. No deep mystery about it. If humans self destruct it will be because we decided to self destruct. If we solve global warming it will be because we decided to solve global warming.

So this week...

Oddly, as the markets went ape sh*t loco I found myself blase. Something fundamental is shifting. It will either be the end of the status quo in America or it won't. If we are headed into a Depression we are in deep doo-doo. We've sold most of our country off to the Chinese for plasma TVs and cheap macaroni at Wal Mart, and we don't have much here to bargain with if we attempt to get any of it back. We do not have the oil to make a quick comeback like we did when WW2 broke out.

But we do have something good - people. Lots of good people. There is an American type that still exists and can be recovered with a little effort. Words that come to mind: "Don't Tread on Me", Frontier, ballsy, fair minded, straightforward. They believe all sorts of different things - but they have a set of solid traits embedded. A little Puritan work ethic, a little Wild West, a little Quaker, a little "screw the Puritans, lets go to Rhode Island and start our own colony.", a little lets go to the moon...within 10 years...a little Boone Pickens, A little Venice Beach.

(Feel free to skip the Donny and Marie jokes at this juncture.)

It's a big American mess that adds up to the individual being highly valued in this culture. We forget that in many places this simply is not the case.

Think: Teddy Roosevelt, Harriet Tubman, Harry Truman, Susan B Anthony, Anne Hutchinson and yes...wait for it....Sarah Palin...I am not saying she belongs on the list yet -and I am not saying I agree with her on most things - I am saying she comes from the "culture of the individual" not the " culture of the victim" or its midnight lover the "culture of entitlement".

We need strong, centered, leadership at this point. Not bromides from the chatty, bratty elites.

Obama No!

Obama No! written by Adolf Reed, Jr in The Progressive is linked here. He writes with grace about a what so many liberals like myself find disturbing and distasteful about Obama. I have said what I thought in a point blank fashion (He is a fraud. He is a liar. He is a front man.) then challenged my readers to look more deeply at Obama. Obama is not a leader. His campaign is not the vanguard of a movement. Obama is a brand. He is a marketing concept. The Got Hope? stickers that play on the Got Milk? campaign express this perfectly. As does the "Warhol" poster of Obama - a rendering in which his supposedly intelligent followers see no irony.

Obama is - to quote the great Brando in Apocalypse Now - an "errand boy, send by grocery clerks, to collect a bill."
Errand Boy: Obama
Grocery Clerks: Dean, Brazille, Pelosi.
To collect a bill: For large Chicago concerns, Wall Street Investors, and George Soros.

Mr Reed expresses this more elegantly than I will ever be able to. Please read his article.

Two quotes:
the hysterically indignant reaction to Geraldine Ferraro's statement that much of Obama's success stems from the fact that "the country is caught up in the concept" of a black candidacy are no different from the campaign's touting its "historic" character.

There is also something disturbingly ritualistic and superficial in the Obama camp's young minions' enthusiasm. Paul Krugman noted months ago that the Obamistas display a cultish quality in the sense that they treat others' criticism or failure to support their icon as a character flaw or sin.

Whatever else happens I know this: Obama is bound for failure either as a candidate or a President. He has created a scenario that allows no other outcome. There is a difference between milk and hope. Products don't make good leaders.