- WASHINGTON, DC -- The media-fueled
hysteria around the presidential candidacy of Barack Obama received a decisive
setback this past week at the hands of ordinary American voters in Ohio,
Texas, and Rhode Island. The forces of the Trilateral Commission, the Council
on Foreign Relations, the RAND Corporation, Skull and Bones, and the Friedmanite
Chicago school, who control the Obama campaign, had fervently hoped to
parlay Obama's successes in Republican and marginal states during the harrowing
month of February into an acclamation of their Manchurian candidate as
the pre-emptive Democratic nominee in the primaries of March 4. Obama's
failure to wrap up the nomination now opens the perspective of prolonged
political warfare, in which intensified scrutiny of Obama's personal history
and campaign organization is likely to lead to a total or partial collapse
of his synthetic candidacy. It may not yet be the beginning of the end
for Obama, but it is the end of the beginning.
-
- Obama's strategy has depended from the beginning on creating
an irresistible tidal wave of hysteria, adulation, media swoon, and sense
of messianic inevitability so as to stampede Democratic voters and the
American people in general into capitulating to his cynical power grab.
He has not been running for president, he has been running for Savior.
His campaign does not offer political reforms, but rather the prospect
of a golden age in which the lion shall lie down with the lamb. He does
not ask to serve as president, he demands transfiguration. This approach
clearly depends on the orchestration of a controlled environment through
the media, the Internet, the press, and other avenues for the manipulation
of public opinion. Everything depends on creating an aura of seraphic superiority,
as the anointed candidate floats to power above the grimy mundane world
of real political conflicts and real political and economic interests.
Depending as it does an extraordinary gullibility, suggestibility, and
manipulability on the part of the voters, this kind of strategy is exceedingly
vulnerable to countermeasures tending to break the controlled environment,
pollute the fantasy with reality, and force utopian dream time to yield
to the world as it actually exists.
-
- THE PRO-OBAMA CONTROLLED ENVIRONMENT NOW SHATTERED
-
- Time is therefore the most critical variable in the Obama
strategy. Everything depends on wrapping up the nomination before the controlled
environment of seraphic superiority, post-partisan purity, transracial
transcendence, and nonpartisan sainthood is punctured and broken by growing
awareness of the actual thuggery, duplicity and dirty politics practiced
by the Obama campaign, and of the numerous scandals swirling around the
candidate. All indications now suggest that the first week in March constituted
the watershed between the time of Obama the beatific perfect Master and
the current era of Obama the discredited, desperate demagogue slogging
through the mud, the blood, and the sand of a real political campaign.
Since so much of Obama's image has depended on completely artificial and
unsustainable hype, that it is now quite possible that he could collapse
in a relatively short period of time like so many other ephemeral crazes.
Obama may become a political Sanjaya, flashing like a meteor across the
heavens and then flaming out into total obscurity and oblivion, and leaving
his followers wandering what in the world his candidacy was all about.
-
- Obama also started with a strategy for gaming the absurd
and obsolete McGovern rules of the Democratic Party in order to carry out
a people power coup or color revolution here in the United States, using
the playbook of similar operations carried out by the Brzezinski faction,
the left wing of the CIA, the National Endowment for Democracy, and the
Soros foundations in such places as Serbia, Georgia, and Ukraine. These
methods involve the use of an attractive and charismatic demagogue, fake
polling, rent-a-mobs and dupe-a-mobs of swarming adolescents, catchy slogans,
colors, and symbols, media whores, abundant cash from wealthy financiers,
narcotics, Nuremberg rallies, balcony speeches, and related stratagems
to orchestrate a coup d'état, often under the cover of elections.
With his eager desire to be the successful protagonist of a people power
coup inside the United States, Obama takes his place in a rogues' gallery
which includes Benedict Arnold, Aaron Burr, Jefferson Davis, and the Roosevelt-hating
executives of the House of Morgan in the 1930s.
-
- UKRAINE ON BRINK OF CIVIL WAR AFTER ORANGE REVOLUTION
IN KIEV, 2004
-
- It is important to note that the Brzezinski-Soros Kiev-centered
Orange Revolution in Ukraine in late 2004 brought that country to the verge
of civil war as the pro-Russian eastern Ukraine balked at accepting the
new regime of NATO puppets and kleptocrats, and threatened secession. The
possible beginnings of something similar can already be observed here in
the United States. Ironically, although Obama has pontificated ad nauseam
about his ability to bring the country together, the concrete observed
result of his postmodern multicultural candidacy has been to split the
Democratic electorate six ways to Sunday: whites against blacks against
Hispanics, men against women, rich against poor, and, with his notorious
Joshua speech and youth cult operations, old against young. This gives
some idea of how a possible future Obama administration would shatter the
United States into a multiplicity of violently contending fragments. Could
civil war ensure? No one could rule it out at the present stage.
-
- OBAMA'S TWO MISSED CHANCES FOR A COUP
-
- The preferred strategy for Obama's handlers would have
a been to administer stunning defeats to Senator Clinton in both Iowa and
in New Hampshire, forcing her and any other Democratic contenders to drop
out of the race, thereby bringing the primary process of the Democratic
Party to an early, abortive and apolitical conclusion - thus avoiding the
politicization and political education of a whole series of states through
a prolonged primary campaign. Obama succeeded in winning the Iowa caucuses,
thanks to the disproportionate weight of affluent suburbanites, academics,
and Malthusian ideologues in the rarefied and ultra-left atmosphere of
Democratic caucuses. After this defeat, the Clinton campaign was left reeling
in disarray. But in New Hampshire, Obama received an important rebuff.
In retrospect, Obama's defeat in New Hampshire can probably be best explained
through the ability of voters in that state to observe the scandals enveloping
Governor Deval Patrick of Massachusetts during his first year in office.
Patrick and Obama share an almost identical public profile, and spout verbatim
the identical utopian and messianic rhetoric, in lieu of positive and specific
policy proposals. This is because both Obama and Patrick are clones of
the same mother ship, the Brzezinski faction. Having seen Patrick in action,
New Hampshire voters had Obama's number as soon as he arrived on the scene,
and they were not buying it. Patrick's rapacity and corruption -- spending
large sums of state money to redecorate his office, insisting on a Cadillac
limousine, and hiring a Chief of Staff for his own wife at a cost to taxpayers
of $75,000 per year -- all this showed what greedy excesses of corruption
might be expected under a future Obama administration. Patrick had promised
to provide relief from onerous real estate taxes, but had entirely struck
out in this regard, severely undermining his job rating on that score.
Obama's failure to knock Clinton and Edwards out of the race in New Hampshire
meant that the primary season would continue until Super Tuesday in the
first week of February. On Super Tuesday, Senator Clinton scored the most
important victory of the entire primary season by winning the Electoral
College megastate of California by a thumping landslide majority of 10%,
while also winning in New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts. Again, her
Massachusetts win, representing a humiliating repudiation of the corrupt
and decadent Kennedy political dynasty, had much to do with voters' familiarity
with the Obama template thanks to their dismal experience under the Patrick
regime. The Super Tuesday results prolonged the contest through the month
of February, giving Obama a chance to win a string of 11 victories in caucus
states, Republican states, ultraleft states, and marginal states, each
time stoking the hysterical adulation of fawning media whores on the controlled
corporate television networks.
-
- Obama second chance to knock Mrs. Clinton out of the
race and seized the Democratic nomination therefore came on March 4. His
failure to win big on that date means that his postmodern coup d'état
will be on hold for seven weeks until the Pennsylvania primary, or until
Puerto Rico votes in early June, or until the Democratic national convention
in Denver in the last week of August. The protracted campaign which now
opens up before us is in itself Obama's worst enemy, since the artificial
enthusiasm of his deluded followers will be harder and harder to maintain
as the weeks and months grind on.
-
- Although he poses as an insurgent, Obama has been collecting
endorsements from the most discredited elements of the Democratic Party,
not just the Kennedy clan. Bill Bradley, elitist Wall Street investment
banker, has now mobilized his own holier than thou rhetoric in favor of
the South Side Savior. We can all remember Bradley for his cowardice and
impotence when Al Gore debated him during the 2000 primary campaign. Gore
lied and lied about Bradley's health care proposal, and Bradley lacked
the guts to denounce Gore as a cynical liar to his face. His impotence
is yet another reason why there is no universal health care in this country.
For Bradley, Obama's raising of political cowardice to the level of a virtue
is doubtless attractive, since it re-interprets his own past failures as
high-minded triumphs.
-
- Senator Jay Rockefeller is also campaigning for Obama.
With Brzezinski, Volcker, and Carter already on board, the Obama campaign
is looking more and more like a Carter re-union. Obama remains a brutal
and dangerous enemy who should not be underestimated, especially given
the extent of his backing from the left wing of the US intelligence community.
-
- OHIO: THE CLASSIC BELLWETHER
-
- Ohio is of course the classic battleground swing state
of recent years. It is the classic bellwether state, and an indispensable
component in any Democratic candidate's formula for winning the Electoral
College. The most important voting group in Ohio is the Reagan Democrats
-- blue-collar, trade union, middle class and lower middle class voters
who deserted the Democratic Party in 1980 after the horrors visited upon
them by Zbigniew Brzezinski's puppet Jimmy Carter. Many Reagan Democrats
are of Eastern European origin Poles, Hungarians, Slovaks, and others.
Many are Roman Catholic. They cultivate strong family centered values and
are interested in New Deal style measures to help them maintain a middle-class
standard of living, obtain adequate medical care, and educate their children
despite the current George Bush economic depression. Many are working-class
women. Many are retired. These voters are not interested in Obama's vapid
utopian rhetoric. They see him as the wealthy and condescending elitist
and spokesman for banking interests that he in fact is. Joe Sixpack, in
a word, is not falling for Obama. Senator Clinton racked up decisive 2:1
majorities among these Reagan Democrats, and this is a fact of vital importance
for deciding who represents the most viable presidential candidate for
the Democratic Party in the November 2000 election.
-
- TEXAS AND THE CRUCIAL LATINO VOTE
-
- Senator Clinton's victory in Texas also has sweeping
implications for the question of which political party might dominate the
Electoral College over the next four decades. In Texas, it was working-class,
lower middle class, and middle-class Hispanics and Latinos who voted for
Senator Clinton over Obama by a two to one ratio. The Latinos are now the
largest single minority group inside the United States. Latinos had succumbed
to the demagogy of George Bush in 2004, with 40% of them voting for the
current tenant of the White House. Latino immigrants are by all odds the
most important swing group for the political future of the United States
in the 21st century, and here again they are not falling for Obama. Senator
Clinton had won the Latino vote by a similar two to one margin in California,
and also racked up two to one majorities among Asian immigrants. Obama's
failure to penetrate the Latino and Asian voting blocs provides an exceedingly
grim commentary on his chances for winning the Electoral College. Another
lesson of Texas is that Senator Clinton won the election, while Obama prevailed
in the caucus. Many commentators are increasingly condemning the caucus
form itself as an inherently elitist and undemocratic method of choosing
candidates, since it tends to exclude working families who cannot devote
so many hours to expressing their political preference, and who also feel
repelled and intimidated by the snobbery and vitriolic class prejudice
of many Obama supporters. In Texas, there were many reports of voter intimidation
and harassment carried out, ironically, by those same Obama forces who
claim to float in beatified detachment far above the normal, grubby, political
fray. The secret ballot was one of the fundamental demands of the prairie
populists of the 1890s, and the Democratic Party would be well advised
to abolish caucuses and go back to the voting booth. The abuses of the
caucus form represent a scandal every bit as big as the fraud committed
in recent years with the help of electronic voting machines.
-
- RHODE ISLAND: INOCULATED BY WATCHING DEVAL PATRICK'S
CORRUPTION
-
- As for Rhode Island, here is another state where Governor
Deval Patrick's personal greed and failed administration have tended to
inoculate voters against Obama's trademark demagogy. Obama's success in
Vermont confirms the analysis offered here ex contrario: Vermont is notoriously
the playground of rich elitists and affluent exurbanites. Similar demographics
were doubtless at work in Obama's success in the Wyoming Democratic caucuses:
this is a state where the Democratic Party can meet in the phone booth,
which Democrats have no hope of ever carrying in the November election,
and where the rich elitists who jetted in to Jackson Hole for the weekend
also stopped off to caucus for the anointed one. Many hourly workers who
might have voted for Mrs. Clinton in a fair secret ballot election were
doubtless working through the weekend and could not take several hours
to participate in a caucus in which they would be looked down on by Obama's
well-heeled backers.
-
- This dynamic is becoming more generally recognized. A
veteran columnist for the London Times, concluding that Clinton was the
only viable choice, wrote: "But Hillary Clinton now seems more likely
than Mr Obama to become the next president of the United States. Mrs Clinton
has won by decisive margins in every big state that the Democrats must
win to send their candidate to the White House. Mr Obama's lead in the
delegate count is based on his success in small states with little electoral
significance or in Republican strongholds such as Alabama and Nevada where
the Democrats have no chance of success. (Anatole Kaletsky, London Times,
March 6, 2008)
-
- As of this writing, Obama has failed to win a single
closed Democrats-only primary election. Of the Electoral College megastates
which are absolutely indispensable for any Democratic candidate, he has
won only Illinois, and he is unlikely to prevail in any other of these
big states. Mrs. Clinton has now won California, Texas, New York, Florida,
Michigan, Massachusetts, New Jersey, and Ohio. Obama's dubious exploits
in such reactionary strongholds as Alaska, Idaho, Kansas, North Dakota,
Utah, and similar places appear nugatory in comparison. It is nice to be
popular with the rich elitists of Vermont or of Jackson Hole, Wyoming,
but this does not have much to do with winning the presidential election.
-
- WITH CLINTON, DEMOCRATS RULE THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE
-
- The lesson of all this is that Mrs. Clinton's campaign
so far adumbrates a durable winning combination for the Democratic Party
among key sociological groups and in the Electoral College. Obama, by contrast,
offers an odd assortment of states, an incongruous slapdash coalition,
a random congeries, a crazy quilt or checkerboard of states where he might
conceivably muddle through. By now it should be plain to all the 2008 will
go down in history as a great watershed year in the latest party realignment
of American politics, joining such landmark elections as the Jacksonian
Democrats of 1828, the Lincoln Republicans of 1860, the Wall Street Republicans
of 1896, the magnificent Franklin D. Roosevelt New Deal of 1932, and the
abominable reactionary Nixon success of 1968. The house we build this year
is the one we will have to live in until the midpoint of the 21st century,
so it is imperative to step back from the Obama craze and its swarming
adolescents and soberly measure what is at stake.
-
- The old Democratic Party of the New Deal was destroyed
first of all by Lyndon B. Johnson's incalculable folly in going into Vietnam,
and then by the catastrophic presidency of Jimmy Carter, Obama's direct
predecessor in the ranks of Trilateral Commission puppets. Fleeing from
the horrors of Carter, Brzezinski, and Volcker, there emerged a group of
voters known as the Reagan Democrats, heavily concentrated in the rust
belt states of the newly de-industrialized Great Lakes region. These voters
were largely Catholics, Eastern Europeans of Polish, Hungarian, and Slovak
background, blue-collar former industrial workers, socially conservative
but economically still looking for a return to the New Deal. Today many
of the Reagan Democrats are working women, retirees, senior citizens, and
working families. In order to win in 2008 and to build a lasting majority
at the same time, it is absolutely indispensable that the Democratic Party
wing back these Reagan Democrats. Without them, states like Ohio, Pennsylvania,
and Michigan, will always be vulnerable to the latest Republican demagogue.
The message from the Ohio primary is that Senator Clinton has by far the
best chance of reincorporating the Reagan Democrats into their traditional
Democratic Party home. Senator Clinton wins this group by better than two
to one. Since so many Reagan Democrats are also Catholics, it is relevant
to recall that Senator Clinton has been winning Catholic voters, the most
important single swing religious group, by similar to 2:1 margins. Obama,
by contrast, is viewed with deep suspicion as a candidate whose soaring
inspirational rhetoric has nothing to do with the gritty realities of daily
life in Sandusky, Altoona, and Flint; Obama is the rich man's candidate.
Polling indicates that up to 25% of Democrats who voted for Senator Clinton
in Ohio would never cast their ballots for Obama, but would rather defect
to Senator McCain. Tepid support for Kerry from Reagan Democrats and Catholics
helped doomed the Democratic ticket in 2004. Why should the wealthy parvenu
elitist Obama fare any better?
-
- OBAMA WOULD HAND THE ELECTION TO MCCAIN
-
- There is therefore the gravest doubt as to whether Obama
could ever hope to carry Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Michigan. Without these
states, any Democratic candidate is doomed to defeat. The nationwide polls
touted by the Obama public relations machine are meaningless: Presidents
are chosen state-by-state in the Electoral College, and not by nationwide
votes -- ask Al Gore.
-
- The Texas results in particular confirm Senator Clinton's
lock on about two thirds of all Hispanic and Latino voters. An attempt
by the controlled corporate media to gin up a generational split among
Latinos felt relatively flat, especially among the vast majority of Latinos
who have to work for a living under difficult circumstances and who need
effective help, and not vapid utopian rhetoric. A look back at the California
primary confirms Obama's inability to appeal to Chinese, Korean, and other
Asian voters. Based on the results from Texas and California, it is fair
to say that Obama is a very inferior vote-getter among the newer immigrant
strata who represent the fastest growing ethnic groups in the United States,
and who therefore embody a large part of the political future of this country.
Latinos do not vote for the Democratic Party automatically; we stress once
more that in 2004, 40% of Latinos voted for Bush, giving him a significant
part of his margin of victory. Here is a group which clearly merits the
most sustained and sympathetic attention on the part of anyone proposing
to win the presidency, and here, once again, Obama strikes out. This means
that Obama has little hope of carrying Florida, another state that a Democrat
must win. For Florida, factor in the important Jewish vote, where Obama's
left CIA connections into the Middle East are causing him serious trouble.
-
- RETIRED VOTERS WILL DOOM OBAMA
-
- Retired people and senior citizens have the highest levels
of voter participation, and this is a demographic which has been extremely
skeptical of Obamaphilia and its utopian expectations. Here lies the potential
for a backlash that would add one more nail to Obama's political coffin
for November. As a British observer noted, "Finally there is the matter
of maturity and experience. This is Mr McCain's biggest gift to the Clinton
campaign. An Obama-McCain contest would be seen as a match of inexperience
against old age. Mr Obama hopes to win this competition by invoking the
spirit of John F. Kennedy. What he forgets, however, is that Kennedy was
swept to power on the crest of the baby boom, when the largest group of
voters was in its twenties. Today these boomers are in their sixties or
seventies - and will not take kindly to the charge that Mr McCain is too
old to be president. Given the high propensity to vote among the elderly,
this election will not be decided by a baby boom but by a senility surge."
(Anatole Kaletsky, London Times, March 6, 2008) Try winning Florida, Arizona,
Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Michigan against that tide.
-
- The only way that Obama might conceivably seize the presidency
is through the kind of scandal assistance which has so notoriously been
employed to catapult him into the Senate in the first place. But even in
this case, Obama's own vulnerability to scandal (Tony Rezko, Larry Sinclair,
Bill Ayers, Bernard Dohrn, Ilyas Achmadov, etc.) is so massive that at
this point no one could be certain that even the most massive scandals
unleashed against Senator McCain could guarantee success for Obama. The
Illinois Senator truly represents damaged goods, and those seriously interested
in evicting the reactionary Republicans from the White House need to dump
him while there is still time.
-
- If we combine Senator Clinton's proven appeal to the
Reagan Democrats, plus her hegemony among Latinos and Asian voters, we
can then turn to the Electoral College map. With Clinton as the candidate,
California stays locked up for the Democratic Party for the entire foreseeable,
future thanks to Asian and Latino voters there. Arizona and New Mexico
move permanently into the Democratic column. Florida ceases to become a
battleground state, and begins to tend heavily Democratic. Ohio, Pennsylvania,
and Michigan are no longer vulnerable Republicans, and also join the Democratic
column. Texas by contrast, begins to leave the Republican deep-freeze,
and becomes much more of a battleground swing state in which the GOP must
expend large amounts of precious resources in order to have a chance --
all thanks to Latino voters. In this way, a solid Democratic majority emerges,
destined to last until the middle of the 21st century, and destined to
provide a political playing field automatically biased in favor of progressives
and against the benighted reactionaries who have been in command since
the advent of Nixon. A new political world, not utopian but realistic,
opens up. These changes, it must be stressed, are of an objective rather
than a subjective order. The personality of Mrs. Clinton is only incidental
to them. Like a sacrament, they work independently of the state of mind
of the person who is bringing them about. A positive outcome of the ongoing
party realignment will shape events for many decades, long after the politicians
of today have departed from the scene. Those who do not like Mrs. Clinton
should recall that she represents neither the cause nor the final fruition
of this party realignment, but rather the transitional figure who serves
as a vehicle to make it possible.
-
- Under the Clinton scenario, the Republican Party ticket
of McCain-Lieberman or McCain-Condoleezza Rice or any other McCain variant
undergoes a catastrophic loss of both White House and Congress in 2008,
reverting to the status of a regional party primarily concentrated in the
deep South, and trading prevalently in Mexophobia and racism. It becomes
a party of the states where Governor Huckabee has won primaries, and ceases
to be a true national party.
-
- Under the Obama scenario, however, these same hypothetical
Republican tickets can win Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Michigan with the help
of the critical swing factor represented by the Reagan Democrats, and also
take Florida thanks to disaffected Latinos who cannot stomach Obama. Texas
belongs to the GOP. California becomes a battleground state, draining Democratic
Party resources that are needed elsewhere. A US attack on Iran occurs within
six months after McCain's inauguration, followed by a likely escalation
towards all-out thermonuclear confrontation with Moscow and Beijing. Martial
law and dictatorship are imposed on the home front, and we discover that
the potential of the 2008 party realignment has been aborted into dictatorship
and world war. This is what it means to succumb to the siren song of the
Obama propaganda machine.
-
- Especially because some parts of the black community
have become infatuated with Obama, it would be well prepared a series of
measures to heal the rift that may result as the Senator sinks into obscurity.
One very concrete progressive reform would be to admit the District of
Columbia into the Union as the 51st state, virtually guaranteeing two black
senators and an additional black member of the House. That is a reform
that would keep on giving forever, and which would materially improve the
voting balance in the Senate. More broadly, the black community would benefit
most from class-based measures for economic recovery. Although the numerical
majority of the beneficiaries of such programs would probably turn out
to be white, a greater portion of the black community -- specifically of
the black underclass ---would benefit as compared to any other group in
the population. The class-based criterion is decisive in making sure that
economic development assistance actually reaches the sidewalks of the black
inner-city ghetto, and is not absorbed by members of the black overclass,
as has so often been the case in the past.
-
- OBAMA FLEES QUESTIONS ABOUT REZKO
-
- Obama's failure had much to do with the fact that he
had been defeated in several media cycles before the Texas and Ohio voting.
This was something new and unusual. It is clear that the Obama supporters
are extremely labile and suggestible, requiring hour by hour maintenance
and support in the form of a steady diet of adulation, fawning, and idolatry
by the stable of kept media whores. Even the temporary disturbance in this
support system leads to disorientation and consternation among these lemming
legions.
-
- The trial of Obama's underworld friend Tony Rezko had
been in the news for several days before the March 4 voting. On March 3,
Obama had beat a hasty retreat from a press conference in which some Chicago
reporters had pushed aside Obama's usual fawning traveling press corps,
and asked tough questions about his meetings and fundraisers with Rezko,
and about the amount of money this gangster had injected into the Obama
campaign. As he often does under these circumstances, Obama began to stutter
and stammer, whining that eight questions was all that he could be expected
to answer, and then ran out the door as fast as his legs could carry. With
that, the reverential decorum of Obama's usual media adoration session
was abruptly broken. The press contingent who habitually travel on the
Obama campaign plane were exposed as contemptible lapdogs, experts in softball
questions, and shills for the Obama campaign.
-
- Obama's hissy fit was a sign that he really did not have
the stamina, grit, and determination necessary to overcome the vaunted
Republican attack machine in the fall. The Huffington Post website, dominated
by a rich cosmopolitan elitist who was an eager participant in the attempt
to remove Bill Clinton from office, and whose open love affair with McCain
she is now trying to put behind her, is normally the inner Temple of Obama
cultism. But even here, the hypnotic spell of this Manchurian candidate
was being broken: on March 6, Rachel Sklar posted a perceptive article
discussing the obvious weakness and fecklessness of the anointed one. Many
Obama skeptics offered comments, pointing out that "Egobama"
was a petulant whiner, too brittle to take on the GOP. Both Time and Newsweek
put Senator Clinton on their covers.
-
- GOOLSBEE TO CANDIANS: DON'T WORRY, OBAMA IS LYING
-
- Even worse were the vicissitudes of Austan Goolsbee,
the Skull and Bones member and Chicago school free-trade fanatic who serves
as Obama's top economic policy handler. Under pressure from Ohio voters
who are deeply disillusioned with the free-trade sellouts of recent decades,
Obama had tried the rhetorical gambit of announcing his intentions to renegotiate
the NAFTA free-trade pact among the US, Canada, and Mexico. Goolsbee had
contacted the Canadian consulate in Chicago to reassure the neocon regime
of Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper that Obama's sallies against
NAFTA were simply demagogic ploys designed to get him votes, and that he
did not mean any of this seriously. Obama was lying, so the Canadian bigwigs
had nothing to worry about. Naturally, Obama's lies were difficult to reconcile
with the much touted politics of hope, and this incident had helped many
Ohio voters solidify their vague suspicions of Obama into a firm resolve
to reject him at the polls.
-
- OBAMA CAN'T FIRE GOOLSBEE GOOLSBEE OWNS OBAMA
-
- Some commentators noted that if Obama wanted to be taken
seriously in the future, he needed to immediately fired Goolsbee. But this
misconstrues the essential nature of the Obama campaign: it is Brzezinski
and Goolsbee who have selected and recruited Obama for his current role,
and not the other way around. Brzezinski and Goolsbee own Obama, it is
they who are the bosses of this puppet candidate. Obama cannot fire them;
if anything it is they who might decide to fire him, and it might not be
pretty.
-
- During these critical days, a number of websites revealed
that, during Obama's campaign for the United States Senate in 2004, he
had met with the editorial board of the Chicago Tribune to announce his
support for US bombing attacks against both Iran and Pakistan. As David
Mendell of the Chicago Tribune staff had reported, "U.S. Senate candidate
Barack Obama suggested Friday that the United States one day might have
to launch surgical missile strikes into Iran and Pakistan to keep extremists
from getting control of nuclear bombs. (Chicago Tribune, September 25,
2004)
-
- Coupled with Obama's more recent enthusiasm bombing strikes
on Pakistan, this provided a useful reminder that Obama, despite his rhetoric
of opposition to the Iraq war, is in reality the most adventurous warmonger
in the entire Democratic field, far more bellicose than Senator Clinton,
and indeed more aggressive and dangerous than Bush himself. Thanks to this
timely reminder, voters were able to see that Obama's self-serving narrative
of his own clairvoyance in regard to the Iraq war was worse than a fairytale
-- it was the cover story for a coming nightmare of aggression scripted
by the revanchist and Russia hater Zbigniew Brzezinski.
-
- Other attacks on Obama took their toll during these days.
The supermarket tabloid The Globe published a story on accusations from
Larry Sinclair at Obama had consumed crack cocaine during a homosexual
encounter. A Yahoo search of the eve of the March 4 voting disclosed that
the Larry Sinclair allegations had been mentioned on over 800,000 websites,
and were continuing to spread rapidly across the Internet. Paul Krugman
condemned Obama in the New York Times as an unscrupulous demagogue for
his use of classic reactionary Republican arguments against Senator Clinton's
plan for universal health care. Sean Hannity of Fox News hammered away
at Obama's close association with the Weatherman terrorist Bill Ayers who,
according to the Obama campaign, was still a friend of the senator. The
London Times revealed Obama's intention of choosing a Republican as his
vice presidential running mate or else as secretary of defense, mentioning
the names of GOP senators Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Richard Lugar of
Indiana in this connection. The sanctimonious Hagel had used voting machines
manufactured by his own company to filch his Senate seat in Nebraska. Lugar
had run for president well before 9/11 on a platform of generating fear
of a coming terrorist attack in the United States. Obama's post-partisan
sellout was already beginning, even before he had the nomination in his
hands.
-
- SEAN WILENTZ: OBAMA'S CUTTHROAT, FRAUDULENT RACE POLITICS
-
- The distinguished Princeton history professor Sean Wilentz
attacked the pervasive media legend that Bill Clinton had somehow been
guilty of racist tactics during the run-up to the South Carolina primary.
Wilentz showed conclusively that the shoe was in fact on the other foot:
it had been the Obama campaign and its media cheering section who had cynically
played the race card. Wilentz wrote: "While promoting Obama as a 'post-racial'
figure, his campaign has purposefully polluted the contest with a new strain
of what historically has been the most toxic poison in American politics.
The Clinton campaign, in fact, has not racialized the campaign, and never
had any reason to do so. Rather the Obama campaign and its supporters,
well-prepared to play the 'race-baiter card' before the primaries began,
launched it with a vengeance when Obama ran into dire straits after his
losses in New Hampshire and Nevada -- and thereby created a campaign myth
that has turned into an incontrovertible truth among political pundits,
reporters, and various Obama supporters. This development is the latest
sad commentary on the malign power of the press, hyping its own favorites
and tearing down those it dislikes, to create pseudo-scandals of the sort
that hounded Al Gore during the 2000 campaign. It is also a commentary
on how race can make American politics go haywire. Above all, it is a commentary
on the cutthroat, fraudulent politics that lie at the foundation of Obama's
supposedly uplifting campaign." (Sean Wilentz, "How Barack Obama
played the race card and blamed Hillary Clinton," The New Republic,
February 27, 2008)
-
- OBAMA'S SCRIPT IS WEARING THIN
-
- Obama's speech in the wake of his decisive defeats in
Ohio, Texas, and Rhode Island showed how quickly his demagogy was wearing
thin in the new climate of adversity. Obama came across as frowning, angry,
saturnine. He spoke of his desire to create a new world in which Americans
could be proud of their own nationality when they traveled abroad -- hardly
a leading preoccupation for Joe Sixpack, who does not get over to Paris
quite as often as the senator and his wealthy elitist backers. He told
the story of one of his supporters from Uganda, who had stayed up late
to watch the Iowa caucus. He suggested that Americans needed to be on their
best behavior when voting because this man from Uganda was watching how
they conducted themselves -- a peculiar thesis, to say the least. This
speech, as so often with Obama, was a script read off the glass plates
of a Teleprompter. He seemed to be overcompensating for defeat, and the
effort fell flat.
-
- Commentators are now suggesting that Obama needs to abandon
his characteristic Nuremberg rally or balcony speech style, and begin listening
to voters about their needs, showing that he understands the economic situation,
has a specific economic program, and possesses the guts and determination
necessary to fight for the needs of his base. But that, of course, might
sully his carefully cultivated seraphic image. Many observers noted that
Obama was a politician with a glass jaw, who could not absorb a haymaker
and then come back up off the mat. A journalist from Texas wrote that her
friends had concluded that Obama had no balls. All these observers were
right: Obama had raised cowardice, appeasement, and preventive capitulation
to the status of positive virtues. His announced intent of giving the vice
presidency or the Pentagon to a Republican amounted to throwing away the
fruits of Democratic victory even before it had been gained. Hard-pressed
working families were taking note.
-
- SAMANTHA POWER SPEWS VENOM
-
- The disarray in the Obama campaign was underscored in
the wake of his defeats in Texas, Ohio, and Rhode Island by the flap around
Samantha Power, who appears to have assumed the role of schoolmarm, governess
and nursemaid in foreign policy questions for the superficial Senator.
One commentator propounded the comparison that Samantha Power was to Obama
as Condoleezza Rice was to Bush. The Obama campaign talks reconciliation
but runs on pure venom, and this was illustrated once again when Professor
Samantha told The Scotsman that Senator Clinton is "a monster."
"We f***** up in Ohio," she added, with a refinement that would
have made the foul-mouthed terrorist Bernardine Dohrn proud. "In Ohio,
they are obsessed and Hillary is going to town on it, because she knows
Ohio's the only place they can win." What are they obsessed with in
Ohio? The savage destruction wrought by free trade? Jobs? Health care?
Wages? One wonders what world the elitist jet set professor lives in. She
also told the BBC that Obama did not intend to be bound by his solemn campaign
promise to engineer a departure of US combat forces from Iraq within 16
months of taking office; Obama would act according to an operational plan
developed in agreement with the generals, she suggested. This meant that
Obama was blatantly lying on Iraq as well as NAFTA, even as he assured
foreign bigwigs and media that he did not believe a word of his own campaign
demagogy. The politics of hope, indeed. Top Obama controller Zbigniew Brzezinski,
never the brightest political bulb, faulted his protégé's
handling of this affair: "I think an expression of regret for using
an inappropriate description of Senator Clinton should have sufficed. And
I don't think she should have resigned." Things were not improved
when Susan Rice, Obama's hate-filled, bellicose, and trigger-happy advisor
on African affairs told an interviewer that it was true that Obama was
not ready for an emergency 3 a.m. phone call, but whined that Mrs. Clinton
was not ready either.
-
- Some observers have noted that when Goolsbee embarrassed
the Obama campaign, he was not reprimanded in public. When Professor Samantha
did the same thing, she was immediately given the sack. The main reason
for this is that Goolsbee belongs to the inner circle of controllers, while
Professor Samantha was there to provide a kind of daycare support for the
labile protagonist. But others saw a large dose of sexism in the obvious
double standard for male and female advisors.
-
- THE OBAMA CAMPAGN AND THE LEFT CIA
-
- The figure of Professor Samantha Power should remind
us of the pervasive presence of the left wing of the CIA and of the US
intelligence community generally in the Obama campaign. Professor Power
is the self proclaimed "genocide chick" whose book about Bosnia
made her famous. She has also written about the Portuguese United Nations
functionary Vieira de Mello, who was blown up in Baghdad in 2003 in an
incident that more than one commentator attributed to Achmed Chalabi, the
darling of the neocons and a leading US agent. Professor Power has also
been beating the drum on Darfur, attempting to create the preconditions
for US military attack on Sudan that would serve the Brzezinski strategy
of driving the Chinese out of Africa; Sudan is one of the main oil exporters
to China on that continent. Professor Power is interested in genocide,
but mainly when that genocide can be pinned on a country the US wants to
attack. She is not interested in the genocide created by the US in Iraq,
with the butcher's bill is already in excess of one million defenseless
civilians slaughtered. She is not interested in the ongoing US genocide
in Afghanistan, where reckless bombing of civilian targets is now the norm.
She is not interested in the greatest genocide of them all, the 40,000
human beings who perish every day from malnutrition, starvation, and diseases
which can be cured for pennies -- all thanks to the savage conditionalities
policies of the US-dominated International Monetary Fund and the US-dominated
World Bank.
-
- In an interview with the London house organ of NATO intelligence,
Professor Power argued in effect that Obama would be a more effective salesman
for the discredited war on terror and for recruiting Europe into future
US aggressive campaigns. She boasted: "Obama can go door-to-door in
Europe and say, 'Look like you I opposed the war in Iraq but what are we
going to do together about Al Qaeda?'" She also hinted that Obama's
ability to demand blood, sweat, and tears from the American people would
far exceed that of Bush: "The Bush years have left the American people
looking for visible change. There was this post-September 11th yearning,
people were waiting for a call to do good - instead of getting the call
we were told to go shopping. What the Obama movement has shown is that
that yearning still exists in people." (London Daily Telegraph, March
8, 2008) In effect, when it comes to breaking strikes, imposing a new military
draft, mandating forced labor, or demanding sacrifices and austerity for
new wars, Obama would doubtlessly have more demagogic power than the discredited
Bush.
-
- MEDIA WHORES FOR OBAMA
-
- The deplorable antics of the media whores for Obama deserve
special attention. Lying, distortion, manipulation, and blatant partisanship
have reached scandalous levels at all the networks and in the mainstream
press, but perhaps nowhere is the situation worse than it MSNBC and NBC.
MSNBC starts every morning with the sleazy Joe Scarborough -- who has never
yet answered the relevant questions about the dead woman whose body was
found in his congressional office -- joined by the obvious partisan Mika
Brzezinski in a tendentious spectacle which has been dubbed Obamavision
by insiders. This is also the network of Chris Matthews, whose pro-Obama
tirades have violated any objective reading of the Federal Elections Commission
regulations on unpaid political advertising. Most hypocritical of all and
therefore worst of all is the hypocritical media whore Keith Olbermann,
who attempts to cover up his reactionary and pro-Wall Street instincts
with his opposition to the Iraq war and his facile contempt for Bush. Olbermann
is no journalist, but rather a ham-handed booster of Obama. He is appropriately
joined by many evenings by the effete British snob Richard Wolfe, whose
claim to understand the political dynamics of the United States is as impudent
as it is absurd. Wolf would be more qualified for reporting on the British
House of Lords. Then there is the atrocious Andrea Mitchell, Mrs. Federal
Reserve and a mouthpiece for finance capital if there ever was one. Olbermann
is also frequently joined by Dana Milbank of the Washington Post, notoriously
the house organ of the Federal Reserve system. Milbank is a member of the
infamous Skull and Bones secret society of Yale University, a monstrous
conflict of interest which he does not routinely disclose. The scurrilous
David Shuster has been rehabilitated and continues in his partisan métier.
Olbermann's line of nonstop groveling adulation for Obama exposes his moral,
intellectual, and political bankruptcy in the harshest light. Whatever
credibility he might have built up over the years with his criticism of
the Iraq war has now been erased by his current meretricious activities
in support of the current flagship covert operation of the intelligence
community. Brian Williams and Tim Russert and NBC occupy the same plane
of media degradation. Most Air America broadcasters have turned out to
be so corrupt as to be practically worthless. The boor and philistine Ed
Shultz has also become a water boy for Obama. Shultz preens himself on
being the leading progressive radio talk show. Shultz is closely associated
with former Democratic Senate majority leader Tom Daschle, who lost his
seat ignominiously because he was so closely identified with the interests
of Citibank, the Wall Street concern which is at the same time one of the
largest employers in South Dakota. The milquetoast Senator from Citibank
made betrayal, capitulation and cowardice into a fine art during his time
as Democratic Senate leader. Ironically, it is just this kind of craven
appeasement of the reactionary Republicans which Obama elevates to the
status of an article of faith. Since Daschle is one of the national co-chairs
of the Obama campaign, Ed Shultz's membership in the Media Whores for Obama
is no surprise. Some members of the controlled corporate media are now
encountering spontaneous outbursts of rage and resentment on the part of
middle-class voters on the campaign trail due to the outrageous favoritism
for Obama shown by their so-called "news organizations." It is
a salutary phenomenon.
-
-
- OBAMA RODE INTO THE SENATE ON RIGGED SCANDALS AGAINST
HIS FOES
-
- We must always remember how weak Obama is as a candidate.
He would not hold his Senate seat today without the providential deus ex
machina of his reactionary backers at the Chicago Tribune, who conveniently
smoothed his path into the Senate by demolishing his two main opponents
of 2004 with the help of well-timed scandals. First there was Marson Blair
Hull, who had spent some $12 million on television advertising in hopes
of winning the Democratic nomination for Senate. A gaggle of Chicago media
led by the Chicago Tribune insisted on opening the sealed court papers
relative to Hull's contentious divorce, swiftly destroying his chances.
Then came the turn of Republican senatorial candidate Jack Ryan, a credible
and formidable opponent heading towards the November election. The same
rat pack of media led by the Chicago Tribune demanded that Ryan's divorce
papers be opened, leading to salacious revelations that knocked him out
of the race too. Instead of fielding a serious candidate, the Illinois
Republican Party at that point decided to punt, trucking in the well-known
buffoon and windbag Alan Keyes as a carpetbagger from distant Maryland.
After that, Obama floated to victory. This is why Obama is such a hypocrite
when he complains about dirty politics; he is one of the biggest beneficiaries
of dirty politics to be sitting today in the United States Senate. This
is why Michelle Obama is such a cynical hypocrite when she boasts that
her husband comes from the rough-and-tumble world of Chicago and Illinois
politics: so far, the rough-and-tumble has been largely directed against
Obama's hapless opponents, and seldom against the arrogant and pretentious
Senator.
|
