(This story from the word GO was set-up one way or the other. I doubt Palin remains the VP candidate based on all the republican reaction to her candidacy, but this “Baby Trig” story was just just too strange from the offset.)
Mike Whitney, from CounterPunch here.
Every four years, liberals and progressives are expected to set aside their beliefs and stand foursquare behind the Democratic Party candidate. This ritual is invariably performed in the name of party unity. It doesn’t matter if the candidate is a smooth-talking politician who’s willing to toss his pastor of 20 years overboard for a few awkward comments, or whether he refuses to defend basic civil liberties like the 4th amendment’s right to privacy. All that matters is that there’s a big “D” following his name and that he shows he’s willing to engage in some meaningless verbal jousting with his Republican opponent.
For nearly a year now, the public has been treated to regular doses of Mr. Obama’s grandiloquent oratory and his sweeping “Follow me to Shangri-la” promises. These flourishes are usually followed by “clarifications” on the central issues which identify Obama as a center-right conservative with no intention of disrupting the status quo. CounterPunch co-editor Alexander Cockburn summed it up like this in a recent article on this site:
(Yep. There are those whom I completely agree with, folks, as contrary as you think I am.)
Is Barack Obama a social democrat or a capitalist tool?
Is John McCain a Glory Boy or a POW songbird?
If these are the choices we have in the upcoming presidential election, a faked out war hero, pushing the Bush agenda, and a corporate tool talking like a social democrat, you’ve got to know this country is up the creek or down the shaft.
by Uri Avnery from Counterpunch, here.
After months of a tough and bitter race, a merciless struggle, Barack Obama has defeated his formidable opponent, Hillary Clinton. He has wrought a miracle: for the first time in history a black person has become a credible candidate for the presidency of the most powerful country in the world.
And what was the first thing he did after his astounding victory? He ran to the conference of the Israel lobby, AIPAC, and made a speech that broke all records for obsequiousness and fawning.
That is shocking enough. Even more shocking is the fact that nobody was shocked.
(What does it say about a candidate who will ignore the suffering of millions of people living in deplorable conditions under constant threat of injury and death? What does it say about that candidate when he professes to be “liberal” and to offer change, but the only thing we witnessed him “change” was his stance toward the Palestinian plight at the recent AIPAC summit last week? What changed? He needs the votes? The support? Is this what a “progressive” leader does for support? I wonder if apartheid still existed in South Africa, would he turn a deaf ear to their suffering for votes? The American Everyman focuses on the suffering of the Palestinian people and will not stand for this kind of insult. If it is an attempt to pander to the power of the right-wing Israeli lobby, then I ask simply “who will he need to pander to later and who else is he pandering to now that we don’t yet know of?” This is an important glimpse into the character of a candidate; at peek at what he values and what he stands for. A year ago he spoke out about the suffering of the Palestinians and last week… he blamed them. He promised a track of land to the Israelis that the world agrees doesn’t belong to them. And he gave Bush’s war on Iran for the state of Israel, his seal of approval. Is this change? Yes; his change. It is said that you cannot change the system from within for it is made of people who, like you, came with those intentions, and the system… changed them. The true outsiders are gone from this election, weeded out by the 5th column. if Obama wants my support, he must change back on at least this one issue: stand up for the Palestinians before it is too late. Stand again with an oppressed people living under racist oppression. Stand for the voiceless and be their voice. It will be hard but the true road is always such. Just ask some of those figures from the ’60s who gave the ultimate measure of devotion to the cause of Civil Rights. Stand now Obama and earn your place among them or sit quietly by and count your votes. These are the moments that make great leaders and puppets alike. Choose.)
The failure by Barack Obama to chart another course in the Middle East, to defy the Israel lobby and to denounce the Bush administration’s inexorable march toward a conflict with Iran is a failure to challenge the collective insanity that has gripped the political leadership in the United States and Israel.
Obama, in a miscalculation that will have grave consequences, has given his blessing to the widening circle of violence and abuse of the Palestinians by Israel and, most dangerously, to those in the Bush White House and Jerusalem now plotting a war against Iran. He illustrates how the lust for power is morally corrosive. And while he may win the White House, by the time he takes power he will be trapped in George Bush’s alternative reality.
By. J. Landay, from McClatchy, here.
The presumptive Republican nominee for president and the leading contender for the Democratic nomination are exaggerating what’s known about Iran’s nuclear program as they duel over how best to deal with Tehran.
Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Barack Obama, D-Ill., say that Iran is developing nuclear weapons.
The U.S. intelligence community, however, thinks that Iran halted an effort to build a nuclear warhead in mid-2003, and the U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency, which is investigating the program, has found no evidence to date of an active Iranian nuclear-weapons project.
“Obama: I don’t carry a Council on Foreign Relations card or know any special handshake.”
David Edwards and Eric Mayes from Raw Story, here.
Worries about One World Order and a North American Union have been “ginned up by the blogs and the Internet,” Sen. Barack Obama told a Lancaster, Pennsylvania audience in a stump speech as he continued his tour through the battleground state.
(“ginned up by the blogs“? is that what he thinks? How about a history lesson, Barack?
“In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn’t such a great idea after all. – Strobe Talbott, Clinton’s Deputy Secretary of State, Time Magazine, July 20th, l992.
“We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries. – David Rockefeller, founder of the Trilateral Commission, address to The Trilateral Commission, June, 1991.)
The Illinois senator also defended the recently re-authorized Patriot Act.
Responding to a question from the audience, asking whether he was a member for the Council on Foreign Relations, a group many allege is leading a move toward one world government, Obama said:
“I don’t know if I’m an official member. I’ve spoken there before. It basically is a forum where people talk about foreign policy. There is no official membership. I don’t have a card, or you know a special handshake or anything like that.”
(But there is an “official membership”; just not for people who are running for office and don’t want to answer the question directly.
from their site listed above:
“A candidate for life membership must be nominated in writing by one Council member and seconded by a minimum of three other individuals. It is recommended that applications contain no more than four seconding letters. The seconding letters do not need to be from Council members, but letters from members are strongly encouraged. “
curious how Obama has spoken there “several times” and he doesn’t even know this much. Or isn’t it curious that his Wife is a member of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, an organization that changed it’s name in late 2006 from Chicago Council on Foreign Relations…)