Tag Archives: obama

Political Rants

Peace train.

My brother Matt was complaining about NPR today. I guess they were talking to one of the fifty generals they have on tap; a guy named General Mills. (“What the hell, does he command Cap’n Crunch?” said Matt.) We groused about this a bit for the podcast. NPR and PBS have always been heavily freighted with retired generals, like the commercial networks and cable channels. But because they have been erroneously described as “leftist” or somehow associated with an elusive liberal elite, they go overboard to disabuse people of that notion. They fired Soundprint’s Lisa Simeone for her association with Occupy DC, apparently fearing that her defense of the 99% would cloud her journalistic objectivity about opera, which is mostly what she covers. Call them National Paranoid Radio.

I’m thinking about NPR particularly because of the president’s declaration that the Iraq war will be drawn to a close at the end of this year, despite the administration’s efforts to keep it rolling for an indefinite period of deployment. NPR was completely on board with the Iraq war back in 2002-03; they dropped the ball on anything like investigative journalism at a time when it might have mattered to get the truth out. People tend to forget that the alternative press, plus outlets like the London Independent, blew holes in the Bush Administration’s case for war well before the shooting began. Counterpunch, for instance, knocked down Powell’s February 5, 2003 presentation point by point within days of its delivery. Much of what they reported is common knowledge now. NPR – like other mainstream news sources – were nowhere on this.

Now that people are beginning to think of the Iraq war as a done deal, we would do well to remind ourselves that no one – absolutely no one – has been held accountable for this major bloodletting. Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Condoleeza Rice have all barnstormed the country, hawking their memoirs, bragging on their participation in committing the crime of international aggression – the worst of all crimes, per the U.N. charter, since so many smaller crimes are precipitated by it. On the hook with them are some of the nation’s most august news organizations, including the New York Times, the Washington Post, and, yes, NPR.

All I’m saying is, with respect to accountability for this historic crime we call the Iraq war, it’s not over until it’s over.

luv u,

jp

Political Rants

Hors de combat.

I’m not a big fan of the notion that people in custody should be abused, beaten, or killed. Once you have them restrained, if circumstances warrant it, that should be enough. Seeing Gaddafi beaten and bloodied, then expired with a bullet hole in his head was kind of sickening, frankly. Sure, he was an autocratic asshole. But he was also defeated and in custody. If the Libyans are starting their brave new future with extrajudicial killings, it doesn’t sound too promising. But then, I suppose, that would put them in the same league as their sponsors … particularly, us.

It’s been said that the Libya intervention is Iraq done the Obama way. Today kind of underlines that notion a bit. We didn’t get all arrogant about it or act unilaterally. We pushed through a UN resolution – something Bush couldn’t have had and probably wouldn’t have wanted, since his administration was actively trying to sideline the UN. Obama is a true imperial internationalist, and the product of that is the kinds of interventions you see in Kosovo and Libya and the kinds of coups you see in Honduras, as opposed to his predecessor’s far more blustering approach to wars and proxy overthrows. Sure, neither is a fly on Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, or even Reagan when it comes to mass killing. But Obama acts to sustain the empire, not destroy it. Bush apparently couldn’t care less about it.

My main concern is that we appear to be going the way of all empires. We are getting more comfortable with the trappings of imperial adventure. We are, in a sense, getting meaner as a society, more willing to mete out harsh “justice”, more attached to our bloodlust. We are, it’s also worth pointing out, falling apart from the inside out, the very bones of our civilization progressively embrittled by forced divestment and diversion of revenues to the maintenance of foreign wars, occupations, and forward bases. As Yeats wrote (later repurposed by Achebe), “the center cannot hold and things fall apart”. Our devotion to maintaining our neoliberal empire at all costs is driving us into a period of significant decline – one that cannot be ameliorated by the deaths in custody of third-tier dictators.

This is not an inevitable process. It’s a choice, and we can choose otherwise. Up to us. Imagine that.

luv u,

jp

Political Rants

Rorschach president.

Perhaps you know this about me, but I’ve never been one to associate support for official Israeli government policy with support for Israelis. There is plenty of dissent in Israel around the conflict with the Palestinians, so I don’t know why anyone on this side of the ocean should feel reluctant to criticize actions that merit criticism. There is such demagoguery on this issue in the U.S., though, that very few people speak their minds, particularly those in the political class. However, to the extent that words and actions matter, I would have to say that Barack Obama has been at least as big a booster of the right-wing Israeli government as his predecessor, and in concrete terms – military aid, security coordination, etc. – arguable and even bigger one.

That’s why the hue and cry over Obama’s Israel policy, initially aimed at procuring a Republican victory in Anthony Weiner’s old Brooklyn district, seems so unmoored from reality. Where did they get this idea that Obama is somehow “soft” on support for Israel? I think I can guess – from somebody’s racist best friend. This appears to be an effort to crack Obama’s support amongst Jewish voters via yet another attempt to dog-whistle his “otherness” – in essence, his black identity – in a part of the country with a history of tension between black and Jewish residents. Republican candidates see an opportunity here – that’s why they’re more expulsionist than Avigdor Lieberman. That’s why we were treated to the spectacle of Rick Perry dancing with Rabbis.

Just to be clear, I do not support Obama’s policy toward Israel/Palestine. But to suggest that he is somehow anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian is just … well, that’s your crack talking. With respect to his actions and rhetoric as president, nothing could be further from the truth. And yet the Republican field senses a vulnerability on this issue, so they’re more than happy to exploit it. I can never quite work out whether these people are amazingly clever or astoundingly ignorant. Either the Republicans don’t know that he’s essentially operating from their right on this issue, or they’re race-baiting him in a not-too subtle way. Either way, it is doing neither the Palestinians nor the Israelis any good. It’s just helping to generate more bad policy.

More bad policy is just what we don’t need. But all you Likud-hawks out there, never fear: Obama is squarely in your corner.

luv u,

jp