When Obama was elected last fall, I found myself wallowing in a kind of hopeful feeling – one that was floated on a number of kind of shaky (though no less comforting) assumptions. One was that Obama might somehow prove to be an exception to the usual political rule, inasmuch as he was an insurgent pitted against a strong establishment candidate, and was not expected to win the nomination. He is also a compelling speaker, a likeable media personality, and so on. So for that two months between Election Day and Inauguration Day, it was possible to suspend disbelief and enjoy a brief vacation from that somewhat oppressive national political reality we’ve lived with all of our lives. That, of course, is over, and I suppose it’s all to the good. Hey, it was the holiday season, right? What better time to feel all festive and delusionary. Now the work begins.

This isn’t the first time I’ve tried to disabuse myself of the notion that there is, in fact, a kind of permanent government that transcends party affiliation or even membership in the general political class. It’s proven to be a pretty persistent principle, supported through Democratic and Republican presidencies alike. George W. Bush’s administration provided a particularly dramatic example of this. As someone at least nominally on the far left, I always saw their policies as being way out in right field, aside from being positively dangerous. But what was truly amazing about the Bush team is that they evoked a very similar reaction from the nation’s core establishment – those individuals and institutions that, in essence, own and run the country. The invasion of Iraq is what did it for Bush. The aftermath of that decision shook these enduring institutional interests to their very foundations – so much so that, after a particularly disastrous year of war (and an electoral rout), Dubya was given a minder in the form of Robert Gates, and Rumsfeld was given his walking papers. Gates is considered a reliable instrument of the American Empire (more so, certainly, than the recklessly self-aggrandizing Rumsfeld), and it seemed as though he was placed there to mind the store through the final two years of Bush’s reign.

And the current administration? Well… look who’s running Defense. They’re still cleaning house, as this week’s changing of the guard in Afghanistan illustrates. Over at Treasury we’ve got Larry Summers and Tim Geithner. I would term these two as “minders,” as well. After Dubya crashed the economy (with help from friends in both parties), reform is politically inevitable, and these two are well-placed to keep said reform from taking on too populist a character. Just this week, Obama’s proposal for the regulation of derivatives has the mark of Summers/Geithner on it, in the form of a loophole you could sail a supertanker full of public money through. While it establishes a central clearing house for derivatives and seeks to standardize them, it does not restrict the creation of more customized (non-standardized) financial instruments, nor does it appear to regulate them. So it offers a kind of voluntary regulation…. easy to evade. On the other side of the street, Obama appears to have his mind changed for him on releasing detainee abuse photos. Again – doing so does not advance the interests of the empire, any more than would democratizing the financial system.

The point is, we ignore the forces of political gravity at our own peril. Best to know not only what we’re fighting for, but whom we’re fighting.

luv u,

jp

I don’t know who (if anyone) reads these posts (aside from me-self…. and me wife), but there might … just might… be one or two of you out there who think I go a little easy on the Obama administration. Yes, I know – I seemed a bit more eager to take a few swings at his predecessor’s administration (alongside millions of others), and most of them were richly deserved. And yes, I did vote for Obama and not (repeat, NOT) for George W. Bush. But hell, we’re just getting started here in Obama-time, and I’ve got more than a few bones to pick with what’s been happening thus far. Let’s start with the b’s….

Bank bailout. Okay, it took some suspension of disbelief, but most of us were able to convince ourselves that the $700 billion sluiced into the coffers of some of our largest financial institutions was solely the responsibility of the Bush administration. Yes, it was their idea (in response to their massive fiscal crisis), but there were plenty of democratic hands on the lever for that one. Now that we’re a solid six months down the road, it’s becoming clear that this business of floating too-big-to-fail banks and insurance companies on oceans of public cash is becoming some kind of model for how to get us out of trouble. The banking “stress test” results were made public today, and it looks like some of the biggies are in line for another infusion. But don’t worry – Tim Geithner says we won’t be involved in the banks on a decision-making level. (Just because we’re paying for them, doesn’t mean we’re going to own them.)

Barack-O – fire this loser, give Summers his pink slip, and get some reasonable people on board, like Paul Krugman, Robert Pollin, and Jim Galbraith. To hell with these Wall Street punks.

Afghani-Pakistan. Okay, this worries me. After months of hearing both administrations complain that the Pakistanis were not doing enough to take the fight to the Taliban, they appear to be doing what “we” asked them to do… and killing lots of civilians in the process, as well as creating a massive outflow of refugees. Though rare as hen’s teeth, I did hear a good segment on NPR’s Morning Edition the other day – an interview with two Pakistani fiction writers, who pointed out that Pakistan’s larger cities are being choked with homeless young people displaced by the fighting. These young Pakistanis are often sought out by religious zealots, who provide them with some base comforts and – perhaps – build on their resentment against the government (and its U.S. paymasters) who rendered them homeless in the first place. Like the Iraqi refugee populations in Jordan and Syria, no good will come of this.

Obama-man: Rethink this policy. Being on the side of a rampaging military is probably not the best idea at this time (or any time).

That’s all I’ve got. Tune in next time… for more cheap advice for the big guy.

luv u,

jp

This is truly the age of the pirate. I don’t mean those Somali teenagers in speedboats – I mean the kind you find trawling the rich waters of Wall Street, J-Street, and Pennsylvania Avenue. And if there were any justice in this world, they wouldn’t have a peg leg to stand on. So short of any proper court proceeding, lets look at who wins the Jolly Roger award this week.

Hedge Fund Managers. Well, here’s a class of individuals that’s been cut a rather serious break over the past year or so. Our massive bailout of the financial industry, A.I.G., etc., has been a godsend to hedge fund managers – albeit not the sort that might put the fear of any god into them. The “trickle-down” theory of economics is so ingrained in our system that we keep using it even when it utterly implodes. Thus the hedge funds and other manipulative sectors of our economy are given unlimited underwriting courtesy of the U.S. Treasury and the Federal Reserve in hopes that this will grease the wheels for the “real” economy that actually employs working people.

And yet, when Chrysler (employer of working stiffs) went through the process of restructuring, it managed to gain concessions from workers, suppliers, everyone but their creditors…. hedge funds! So thousands will be at least temporarily laid off as the company goes into a controlled bankruptcy spiral. What the fuck – if we can pour billions into these massive speculative funds, why the hell can’t we divert some of that money into something that actually creates jobs… particularly when the class of companies that received the most bailout money are cutting manufacturing off at the knees? Justice, please.

Good ship Cheney. Just to return briefly to the detainee abuse / torture issue. Does anyone think for a moment that the Bush Administration wasn’t trying to elicit false confessions out of people? Am I the only one who remembers the fact that Cheney was constantly running over to CIA headquarters in the run-up to the Iraq war, pressing them to come up with that “smoking gun”? A New York Times reporter I heard on the radio this week dismissed the notion that they were trying to drum up incriminating – if false – evidence about Saddam Hussein’s government; his point was, in essence, why wouldn’t they just make it up themselves? Answer – it doesn’t matter. They obviously felt they needed some evidence to ratchet up the fear factor and build support for the war. That’s why they relied on a drunk like “Curve Ball” and a shyster like Chalabi. That’s the central principle of terrorism, as the name suggests – scare the be-jeebus out of them so that they’ll do what you say.

So… when are we going to stop letting these fuckers off the hook?

luv u,

jp