Over the past year, the Obama administration's newly-established loyalty to right wing capitalism and the neocon Bush agenda has been taken to the point that Obama has even been referred to as "Barack Bush") (1).
The only explanation that comes to mind is that Obama decided that this show of "bipartisan" loyalty and political correctness, along with his adoption of existing right wing policies and approaches, was the best way to prove to the conservative right wing that their agenda of bailouts will NOT work. Then, when these right wing approaches do fail in public, the doors will be open to meaningful centrist change.
So far, however, the Bush bailout has lead to no meaningful change on Wall Street (still deregulated) and it has "helped fuel a new era of Wall Street wealth" (2) - while 15 million Americans remain unemployed, their numbers rising to the tune of over 200,000 newly unemployed (and as many jobs lost) per month. The right wing neocon approaches continue to fail and we already know that Obama will get the blame for it all, never mind who started it all.
We can only hope that this explanation of Obama's strategy is correct. If not, we elected a very articulate and ineffective man as president, who may well do the black community a disservice, likely for half a century to come.
And, then there is the Bush War of Vengeance On Afghanistan. At the moment, Obama faces a momentous decision - to upscale or downscale U.S. forces in that war-torn nation. Here we must keep in mind that already "we've been in Afghanistan longer than any other war in American history" (3). Currently, Pakistani forces are moving on militant strongholds, with the "Army launching a ground offensive against al-Qaida and the Taliban after recent attacks" (4).
Ted Rall has been attuned to the Afghanistan War from the start and he has a few rather informative things to say on the issue (3). Ted was able to see through the George W. Bush administration early on and apparently must feel that same need in dealing with the "Barack Bush" (1) administration.
Did you know that "al-Qaida's presence in Afghanistan in 2001 was negligible? Al-Qaida was a Pakistani phenomenon. It still is" (3). Even today, "Al Qaeda isn't so much in Afghanistan as it is in Pakistan" (5).
Did you know that "every Taliban is not al-Qaida"? Those "Talibs" who support the warring in Afghanistan are referred to by South Asian experts as the "Neo-Taliban," who are "the most recent reflection of a historical truth: Afghans set their political differences aside when it's time to kill invaders" (3).
Did you know that "afghanis" are the national currency and that "Afghans" are the people of Afghanistan. Rall reports that "Neither the president or the U.S. news reporters know this" (3).
"Eight years," and the complaint basically reads the same, that we still do not know what we are talking about in Afghanistan. Indeed, the Associated Press still uses the terms "al-Qaida" and "Taliban" almost as if they were interchangeable (4).
"As for containing the Taliban, which ones? There are many on both sides of the Af-Pak border. None is said to have Al Qaeda's global agenda. Most just want the foreigners out. The Afghan Talibs, ethnic Pushtuns, want a share of power in Kabul commensurate with their majority status" (5).
"Look, we were never going to win. No one does empire like the British, but the Afghans beat them like a drum. Next-door neighbor, Russia, knew all about the Afghans and their culture, They lost, too. There was no way we were going to outperform the English and the Russians" (3).
I quite agree. If Obama escalates the war in Afghanistan, he will very likely be doomed to failure. Which is to say that the right wing Republican Bush administration created and put us into this endless war of revenge and this mindless world of right wing bullshit, and the Democratic Obama administration has no idea as to how to get us out of either Afghanistan or out of the right wing stink.
In the definable world of human culture, ideas always precede words, which is to say that words follow ideas - after both of which come actions. Consistency in thought, word and deed is essential to clean thinking and honest living. It is a moral principle, critically important in natural science and natural philosophy.
You cannot say one thing and do another without committing a moral blunder. The political right wing in the U.S. knows nothing about any of this, dedicated as it is to the avoidance of factual knowledge.
1 | 2