graeme
am I ready to be converted?
Posted on: 04/05/2009 14:06
I have been close to alone in expressing doubts about Obama. I don't like many of the people around him. I don't like much about his financial support. I didn't like his vagueness in the campaign. I think his pullout from Iraq is mostly smoke and mirrors. I look on his renewed war in Afghanistan with horror. But...
Today, he made an astonishing proposal. He wants to begin the work of reducing and even abolishing nuclear stockpiles. That has implications for international reorganization and structure that go way beyond the weapons t hemselves. This, if it is at all real, is the most inspirational move in any government that I have ever seen.
It is so powerful, I really do want to believe.
graeme
- Login or register to post comments
- Add new comment
Search
Comments
QuestionMark
You have to put into
Posted on: 04/05/2009 16:19
You have to put into political perspective. This is the one move that costs virtually nothing, saves a lot of money in the long run, and no one can criticize. Its like Guantanomo Bay at this stage.
Dont look at politicains for idols and deities...the only reason I support Obama is because he is at least intelligent as opposed to Bush.
graeme
oh, QM, you sound
Posted on: 04/05/2009 16:21
oh, QM, you sound depressingly like me.
graeme
Pickle
Well glad to see the
Posted on: 04/06/2009 19:40
Well glad to see the hopey-changey warm glow has dimmed on at least a couple people :)
HoldenCaulfield
Pickle you sound like you
Posted on: 04/07/2009 21:46
Pickle you sound like you would like Obama to fail. You do realize that if he fails, if he isn't the real mccoy, we are likely screwed, you get that right? Were you looking for more of the same? More flooded New Orleans with Minorities drowning off of roof tops? More damn the torpedos, pump the oil who gives a shit? More screw regulation let the Corporations rape the country?
The guy has been in power for 2 months and in that time among other things he has reversed a ban on stem cell research, freed up funding for sexual health and birth control clinics around the world and started the ball rolling on a host of programs that would see healthcare for all americans, etc.
Not a bad 2 months, hope, change and a warm glow is a helluvalot better than the despressing hopeless, Government can do shit-for-you stuff of the last 8 years.
SLJudds
Stay doubtful, but remember
Posted on: 04/08/2009 14:26
Stay doubtful, but remember that politics and the media are masters of the art of "Perception Management" - otherwise known as "The Big Lie. How to start them and how to spread them".
Pickle
HoldenCaulfield wrote: Pickle
Posted on: 04/08/2009 17:10
Pickle you sound like you would like Obama to fail. You do realize that if he fails, if he isn't the real mccoy, we are likely screwed, you get that right? Were you looking for more of the same? More flooded New Orleans with Minorities drowning off of roof tops? More damn the torpedos, pump the oil who gives a shit? More screw regulation let the Corporations rape the country?
The guy has been in power for 2 months and in that time among other things he has reversed a ban on stem cell research, freed up funding for sexual health and birth control clinics around the world and started the ball rolling on a host of programs that would see healthcare for all americans, etc.
Not a bad 2 months, hope, change and a warm glow is a helluvalot better than the despressing hopeless, Government can do shit-for-you stuff of the last 8 years.
I'm always bewildered when people start ranting about how bad Bush was and how I am a neo-con, etc. whenever I express doubts about Obama. Just because I think Obama has been made into a demi-god (don't get me wrong, I like the guy) doesn't mean I think people should look at him a little more realistically. He won't change the world, the problems that the US faces will not disappear because of some legislation he passes...
graeme
The tensions are there
Posted on: 04/08/2009 21:52
The tensions are there because we all have such a stake in him succeeding. I hope against, to some degree, reason that he will succeed because I can see the utter disaster shaping up and shaping very quickly if he does not succeed.
graeme
HoldenCaulfield
graeme wrote: The tensions
Posted on: 04/08/2009 23:29
The tensions are there because we all have such a stake in him succeeding. I hope against, to some degree, reason that he will succeed because I can see the utter disaster shaping up and shaping very quickly if he does not succeed.
graeme
Amen
lastpointe
graeme both your topic
Posted on: 04/10/2009 05:54
graeme both your topic threads are rolling around causing you confusion.
as to Obama
the usa is going through unprecidented socialization and it will be interesting to see how it all falls out.
I hope he can turn the tide in the USA, we all need them to get back on track.
graeme
yeah - I edited one post
Posted on: 04/10/2009 07:01
yeah - I edited one post because I had some silly mistakes in it. But then both got printed.
The story of my life.
graeme
Pinga
I'm going to post here, if
Posted on: 04/10/2009 08:27
I'm going to post here, if only to ensure that this is the one that shows up as the "most recent" post...
Graeme...I hope that you continue to have reasons to doubt your original fears whcih overrode your hope. May that shift to hope from doubt be eaten away by a steady pattern of simple small moves which culminate in change.
Systems can be changed...but it takes will..and trust.
graeme
There will certainly be
Posted on: 04/10/2009 11:29
There will certainly be change of some sort. That's the worrying part. Obama represents the only hope for the sort of change most of us want. The alternative is a nation increasingly living in fear which is exploited to promote aggressive wars and to destroy what remains of American democracy - much of which has already happened in the last sixty years.
Obama is, I suspect, America's last chance. And we are next door and closely tied.
graeme
graeme
I have not so much moved to
Posted on: 04/11/2009 11:54
I have not so much moved to admire Obama. What I am trying to do is to take into account the situation he faces and, in so doing, get rid of unreasonable expectations.
The situation is that the whole of the US, running right though the fabric of society, is a stunning mess. American democracy is full of myths about the nature of the US and the world around it. Obama cannot do much to undo those myths. But they limit what he can do in social legislation like medicare, and in foreign policy.
The power of money is enormous, and much of it tied effectively into the myths. USs foreign policy is largely focussed on the use of military power to ensure American dominance of the world economy. That's largely what AFghanistan is about.
But if Obama pulls out of Afghanistan, he will be destroyed by the power of money and its manipulation of American popular myth.
Is is possible, then, his very public build up of that war is guard against just such criticism? Is it possible that his real policy is an exit strategy based on his own myth that there is a "reasonable" majority in the taliban one can negotiate with?
Similarly, we may be disappointed that he is not investigating Cheney, bush, et all for war crimes and lies. But he can't. The reality is that any such investigation would tear the country apart and destroy Obama, too.
Obama raised hopes of a revolution. But a revolution is way beyond his powers or the powers of anyone. At best, one can hope for Obama to survive by tiptoeing around the most contentious issues and, if following essentially the old policies, at least following them with greater intelligence than we have seen.
That doesn't really solve anything. But it does buy time, and it does buy the chance for make changes in the long run.
graeme
nighthawk
It sometimes feels like for
Posted on: 04/13/2009 23:20
It sometimes feels like for every move Obama's administration makes toward change, he takes a step back. Most recently he retained the Bush administration's refusal to grant habeus corpus rights to detainees at Gitmo and Bagram. This represents a reversal from his apparent position during the presidential campaign, and is a decision that firmly puts the brakes on the idea of wide-scale change from Obama in regards to the war on terror.
I've always been skeptically optimistic of Obama's possibilities for change, but this is a pretty big setback.
Motheroffive
Here's an interview with Mike
Posted on: 04/14/2009 03:16
Here's an interview with Mike Farrell of M*A*S*H* fame on the subject but it's worth watching all four parts (only about 25 minutes altogether, if you don't watch the commercial segments at the end of each part).
graeme
Well, i think we have to
Posted on: 04/14/2009 08:44
Well, i think we have to recognize that the rubber does meet the road.
American policies were never simply the fault of Bush. He was extraordinarily clumsy in carrying them out. but his policies were not, at root, any different from those purused for generations.
That sort of thing is what the American people have wanted. All sorts of factors play into it - propaganda manipulated by the powerful, wholesale corruption in government, bizarre religious ideas, blind fear of people who are different in any way, suspicion, greed--it's all in there and can't be undone in one election day.
The question is not whether Obama can do all the things we want him to. Because he can't. And if he tried, he would be a dead man as soon as it became obvious where he was going.
The question is whether he does have an objective that is different, whether he can make sufficient progress without alienating himself for all his sources of power, whether even that sufficient progress will be enough...
Like others, I am disappointed in much of what I have seen. Perhaps unlike others, the disappointment has not been disillusioning because i had no illusions to start with.
Obama has to adjust to world in which the US will likely be somewhat poorer, will likely be somewhat weaker and declining, will likely see its fundamental democratic institutions and practices under severe attack, will be powerfully tempted to use force out of sheer habit and also out of fear that it much use it now or never. And, if he is anything of an idealist, he will have few friends around him to help.
That's the context in which we have to judge him.
graeme
spockis53
And yet by most accounts,
Posted on: 04/14/2009 08:59
And yet by most accounts, actions taken by the Obama administration in the short time he's been in control appear to be working..
1) international respect from friendly countries
2) a quieting of violent rhetoric from enemy countries
3) stabilization and return to profitability of banks
4) the return of respect and brains to the US scientific community
5) public communication direct from the President to the people through the media
6) a move to promote healthcare for all
7) stimulus that is creating jobs and regulation to control greed
8) a new (yesterday) international declaration to address the global environment
9) ...and yesterday there were same sex families invited to participate in Easter on the White House lawn (for god's sake!) !
and on and on and on...
This President is really and honestly committed to ideological change.
Time for optimism.
LL&P(with some progressive government for the people)
Spock
graeme
/well, we don't disagree -
Posted on: 04/14/2009 09:19
/well, we don't disagree - though there could be modifications to all of the points you mention. And one could compose a list of negatives - the failure to control Israel, the stepping up of the war in Afghanistan and, let's face it, Pakistan, the refusal to apply habeus corpus to prisoners in guantanamo, a medicare proposal which leaves the system in the control of private interests and, therefore, hopelessly expensive... And so it goes.
i am not convinced that Obama represents any real change or that enough real change is possible. But I do agree we have to keep looking for positive signs.
graeme
Pickle
graeme wrote: /well, we don't
Posted on: 04/15/2009 19:11
/well, we don't disagree - though there could be modifications to all of the points you mention. And one could compose a list of negatives - the failure to control Israel, the stepping up of the war in Afghanistan and
graeme
Just a quick question graeme: why exactly are you opposed to the war in Afghanistan???
The_Omnissiah
Ever read Frindle? You can
Posted on: 04/15/2009 19:18
Ever read Frindle?
You can remain doubtful to give him power to do good. So keep your doubt, but take pleasure in his victories.
As-Salaamu Alaikum
-Omni
graeme
useful
Posted on: 04/15/2009 20:35
useful point,Omnissiah.
Pickle I have several reasons for opposing the Afghanistan war.
1. It is almost certainly unwinnable. Not only does Afghanistan have a long record of repelling foreigners, the west has lost almost every war of this type (essentially a colonial war) since 1945. This type of war has become unwinnable. And I'm not a big fan of fighting losing wars for the thrill of it.
2. It is extremely destabilizing for the whole region, and could well lead to a broader war with the collapse of pakistan.
3. Despite the rhetoric about us being there to help women, we have killed, mutilated, widowed, oraphaned, starved and displaced tens of thousands of them. though our press never bothers to mention that.
4. The US is there to secure the energy supply route to SE Asia. That is not a very good reason for points 1 to 3. (And that reason for invading Afghanistan was openly advocated by people like cheney years before 9/11.
5. Canada is there only because our corporate leaders who depend on the US market want to kiss up to the US. That's an old story in Canadian history, going all the way back to our killing Boer farmers in south africa to kiss up to britain.
6. Much of NATO is keeping a much lower profile. That's because they know this war is largely a fraud, has nothing to do with their interests, and is a loser.
graeme
----------
graeme wrote: It is so
Posted on: 05/01/2009 09:33
It is so powerful, I really do want to believe.
graeme
No! Don't do it, man! Grab a hold of your senses!
graeme
well, I do reduce it to
Posted on: 05/01/2009 15:55
well, I do reduce it to believing, perhaps, in what is possible. I don't think anybody can reverse the general direction of the US. I think we can hope for a leader who is smart enough to realize that the old ways just won't work any more. They haven't for a while - and one can hope he will be smart enough to back away from th reats and force - as he has so far in latin america.
I don't think it is politically feasible for him to prosecute torture cases. It may not even be politically feasible to get out of the Afghanistan (now Pakistan/Afghanistan) mess. It isn't feasible to get entirely out of the Israel entanglement - but it might be feasible to re establish some control over it.
graeme
bishop
graeme wrote: Today, he made
Posted on: 05/02/2009 17:12
Today, he made an astonishing proposal. He wants to begin the work of reducing and even abolishing nuclear stockpiles.
graeme
What does this mean? Does Obama want to reduce/abolish nuclear stockpiles in the US?
Does he want to abolish stockpiles everywhere but the US....everywhere including the US.....what exactly does this mean? Will this be a global decision or one brought by force....if by force?
Thanks,
Bishop B.
Birthstone
graeme wrote: Obama is, I
Posted on: 05/02/2009 17:50
Obama is, I suspect, America's last chance.
graeme
hi guys - I'm in the mood for some hope today, so watch out for a flakey post. We have talked about the end of the American Empire. A few years ago, as Bush was invading Iraq, I was pretty sure that most of Europe for sure, and the rest of the world was going to start dismantling the American Empire slowly but surely. With the military so stretched and economy being sucked into the war, and the arrogance of Bush losing America its credibility, I felt we were watching the end.
Obama has turned that around. I think there is great value in leadership & voice & the mood of hope, even though substance is important too. What I see is a juggernaut of global dictatorial bureaucracy (disguised as capitalism, focused on greed) that can't be changed by one man, but what can change is people's perspectives & expectations. I think that Obama is truly a good guy, with a wise heart & head. If he is, and doesn't collapse, and people begin to trust him, then his words & speeches start to mean more than just a glimmer. They become the train of thought for everyone who hears him, and people walk away with a new spring in their step. it is a ripple effect.
Bit by bit people are expecting America to be turning a new leaf to green, justice, whole world possibility - because Obama says so, layered with Gore saying so, and Gates and Oprah too (hows that for culture shifting?!) As they win over people, and brighten people's outlook, they leave room for inspiration to turn to action and action to turn to change.
My oh my - I sound flakey, but I think it works this way. The key is - do we have someone trustworthy and overall forward-thinking, or a liar? The substance can only come if people are open to it, and see it could make a difference, and it will come from smart people. He's smart enough to head in the right direction. Will Obama trade up as time goes by for better & brighter people, with radically good ideas? I trust that he will.
OK - in case you thought I was wearing rose-coloured glasses, I will sadly admit that as I get idealistic, I tend to gloss over all the opinions of people who don't agree with me. They are strong, wiht a different value system, and I believe they work against this process. If nothing else, they will work like crazy to take him out of office, whether he is doing a good job or not. They can undermine this process, but that ain't Obama's fault. Without getting into a debate on the presidency of Clinton, I believe Ken Starr was a crook & a huge disaster that sucked the energy & idealism of the American people. His work and that of the people behind him was not for the good of the USA or world, it was for greed & money & power.
graeme
bishop b, I must say you've
Posted on: 05/02/2009 21:53
bishop b, I must say you've thrown me for a loop. In my fit of enthusiasm, I didn't stop to consider exactly what obama meant by reducing nuclear stockpiles. I presumed he meant everybody's stockpiles.
In fact, such a deal had been worked out, and the russians did dispose of some of their stockpile - only to discover that Bush had changed the rules to permit him to put some of his into storage instead of destroying them.
graeme
bishop
graeme wrote: bishop b, I
Posted on: 05/03/2009 12:54
bishop b, I must say you've thrown me for a loop. In my fit of enthusiasm, I didn't stop to consider exactly what obama meant by reducing nuclear stockpiles. I presumed he meant everybody's stockpiles.
In fact, such a deal had been worked out, and the russians did dispose of some of their stockpile - only to discover that Bush had changed the rules to permit him to put some of his into storage instead of destroying them.
graeme
graeme,
If I were an extremely wealthy corprate american....I would somehow (maybe secretly and/or thru manipulation/blackmail/whatever) give an obscene amount of money to all political parties, and then no matter who wins....favours are owed....strings are pulled....I get my way....I get more power and more money thru my self serving demands and then have more money to do the same but BIGGER next election....and keep it going until I rule the world...... no one (the public at large) would be the wiser....................................I wouldn't really, I'm just suggesting that our "free" and "democratic" nation is a breeding ground for corruption and every politician and leader is corrupted to a certain degree and we should never FULLY trust our leaders....always question everything, every motive, in every situation, after all, it is our job as the public to make sure that our leaders are leading us down the right road, otherwise, we share the blame for corruption and ultimatly, destruction.
Thanks,
Bishop B.
graeme
too true, and nothing
Posted on: 05/03/2009 14:35
too true, and nothing theoretical about it. that's why I was originally critical of obama - and now see hope only in some possibility or wiggle room.
graeme
lastpointe
Wondering how you feel now
Posted on: 05/19/2009 11:10
Wondering how you feel now graeme?
graeme
well, pretty disheartened. I
Posted on: 05/19/2009 11:41
well, pretty disheartened. I still t hink Obama is better than Bush, but I really wonder how much room he has. He seems to be plunging into a fresh disaster in Pakistan - but it leaves too quickly, he'll be damned as a failure. He has done nothing whatever to extend health care. But given the state of the American economy, I don't see how he can.
He needs a big success of some sort to strengthen himself for other moves he must make. but it's hard to see where the big success is going to come from.
graeme
graeme
last pointe, I should add a
Posted on: 05/19/2009 20:51
last pointe, I should add a footnote. I think this is a terribly dangerous point in the hsitory of US government.
If Obama does not deliver, there could be a terrible disillusionment - and I cannot even guess what form that might take/ But there are serious blockages in just about every direction he might move.
He cannot deal with the torture issue in any investigation without ripping the country apart. But letting it go will be terribly disillusioning.
He cannot make any significant improvement in the health system. Powerful lobbyists and a weak economy block that.
His moves on the economy, perhaps necessary, have been primarily to relieve therich of any responsibility and shovel more money at them. People losing houses and jobs will eventually react to that.
His ramping up the war in AFghanistan makes no sense. But I don't see any exit strategy, either.
I'm not oat all sure he can control Israel -and if he makes it too obvious he wants to control Israel, he makes powerful enemies.
And, forgotten in this temporary stabilizing - so it appears - in theconomy is the reality that the US has begun a serious decline relative, in particular, to china and also to other. That's carries a price in power - and also a price in living standards that we haven't yet begun to see.
One man, no matter how inspirational, can change a whole country. There are important forces in the US that are hostile to Obama's chances.
I want him to succeed because he may well be the last chance. But I'm fearful ofwhat I see.
graeme