Will The Real President Obama Please, Please Stand up?

Beneath the Spin * Eric L. Wattree

Will The Real President Obama Please, Please Stand up?

.

I’ve been a steadfast Obama supporter every since the very first day he arrived on the political scene, but I must admit, it hasn’t always been easy. First, even as a candidate, he reversed his position on FISA after it was revealed that the Bush administration had been illegally spying on the American people. Then once elected, instead of allowing his attorney general a free hand to hold Bush and Cheney accountable for the war crimes committed in Iraq as prescribed both by law, and his oath of office, he sent the message to his attorney general, and the American people, that we shouldn’t "look back" on the murder of close to a million people.

.

Then, instead of giving us the change that we could believe in that he promised during the campaign, he’s allowed the Republican Party to frame a completely false political debate which has given them free rein to hold the American people hostage and keep us in absolute misery. And while all this is going on, the only word coming out of his mouth is "compromise."

.

Many of my fellow Obama supporters contend that the president can only do so much, which is absolutely true. But what he can do is use the bully pulpit of the presidency to educate the people, which he’s failing miserably at. The entire GOP agenda is based on flat-out lies, the blatant corruption of facts, and a deviation from reality that’s so severe that even a child could see it if someone would simply take the time to explain it. So why isn’t Obama doing that?

.
President Obama should have a staff right next door to the Oval Office that’s dedicated to nothing but poking holes in Republican lies. If the White House had such a staff, John Boehner, Eric Canter, and the rest of the GOP demagogues would be afraid to tell the blatant lies that they’re telling, because they’d know that every time they told a lie, the very next day the entire news cycle would be dedicated to pointing it out.
.
How much time would it take to demonstrate to the American people that it’s not the rich who create jobs? It’s the poor and middle class who create jobs by buying goods and services. It doesn’t matter how big a tax break you give the rich, they are not going to hire anyone to produce goods unless they have someone to sell them to. Is Gucci going to hire people to produce his handbags if he’s forced to sell them in a homeless shelter? Of course not, because no one in the homeless shelter can afford to buy them. Well, that’s exactly what the GOP is turning America into - a vast homeless shelter.
.
The American people need to be educated to the fact that the GOP, in collusion with multinational corporations - and I now suspect, the United States government - are purposely keeping unemployment high in order to bring down the standard of living of the American middle class. In the new global economy American corporations are forced to compete with countries who pay their workers less per week than many Americans spend on lunch per day. Thus, the standard of living of the American middle class has become a liability. So the continued high unemployment rate, in spite of record corporate profits, is nothing but a ploy to get the American people accustomed to expecting less for their labor. That’s also why the GOP is engaged in a concerted effort to destroy labor unions.
.
But it’s not just labor that’s under attack. Every facet of American life is under assault. It started with the abolishment of the Fairness Doctrine. That allowed corporations to turn the public airways into a propaganda conduit. Corporations are now allowed to lie to us with impunity and deprived us of all reliable sources of information in the news. And at the same time, the entertainment division of that very same corporate media is telling us what and how we should think, act, and what is and is not acceptable. The corporatists are turning us into unthinking Stepford children. Thank God for the internet, but I assure you, they’ll be zeroing in on it much more aggressively very soon.
.
In addition, our schools are being corporatized. If we don’t do something about that soon, in the very near future corporations will be programming our children instead of educating them. We’re currently knee-deep in a class war, and our educational system is being used to solidify and reinforce a new class system. In the very near future, poor and middle-class children will have one of two options - either accept whatever crumbs the corporations decide to throw at them, or become cannon fodder for the military-industrial complex.
.
Have you noticed that the children of the rich are no longer even expected to fight for this country? So why should they care about the endless wars that we’re engaging in? No one they love is dying, so it’s just a matter of dollars and cents to them.
.
So the rich don’t pay taxes, and they don’t fight and die for the country. So exactly what is their function in society? I’ll tell you what it is – to sit back like royalty, prosper on our misery, and complain that the grandparents of the people who are dying for the country are too much of a burden on the nation. That’s it. Then, to promote their interests, the GOP is holding us hostage every chance they get, and saying, ”Let them eat cake” - and the president is talking about balance and compromise? Please!
.
So yes, there is something that one man can do. The President of the United States can educate America, and thereby, save the American people from utter disaster. Because the one thing that holds this entire conspiracy together is ignorance. Without it, the conspiracy will come tumbling down like a house of cards.
.
So Mr. President, at this point in our history compromise is the very last thing we need. What we need now is firm, aggressive, and uncompromising leadership.
.

Eric L. Wattree
http://wattree.blogspot.com/
Ewattree@Gmail.com
Citizens Against Reckless Middle-Class Abuse (CARMA)
.
Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.

Sphere: Related Content

Democrats: I'll Resume My Donations When You Resume Fighting Republican Trickery?

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE

Democrats: I'll Resume My Donations When You Resume Fighting Republican Trickery?

The one factor that contributed most to the downfall of the Democratic Party during the seventies and eighties was allowing conservative Republicans to seize control of the political rhetoric. The Democrats simply sat back and allowed themselves, their constituency and their agenda to be redefined in the eyes of the American people by conservative "spin doctors" without rebuttal. As a direct result, they've allowed the term "liberal" to become a bad word in the political lexicon.

When you consider how methodically the conservatives went about mounting their assault on the liberal agenda you can't help but recognize that it was a stroke of genius. Ironically, the conservatives took the Democratic Party's strength and made it a political liability. First they took the party's penchant for being concern with the plight of the downtrodden and coined phrases such as "bleeding heart liberals" and "tax and spend Democrats." They then played on the frustration of the middle class by tying civil rights legislation, welfare, and crime into one neat bundle as the source of middle class woes; then they attributed all of these problems to what they called the Democrat's tendency to be " bleeding heart liberals". Once the connection was made between minorities, welfare, crime, and the liberal agenda, it was just a matter of repeatedly hammering the message home.

In addition, conservatives used such tactics as spitting out the word "liberal" as though they were saying rapist. In this way they not only implanted a negative attitude toward liberalism in the mind of the voter, but it was said in such a way that the implication was made that it went without saying that all the negative stereotyping of liberalism was true. In other words, their attitude seems to suggest, "I could substantiate what I'm saying about liberals, but I don't think it's necessary since we all know what they're like." And in the election that spawned the "Republican revolution" the voters said, yes, we do.

Through these strategies conservatives accomplished three goals with one ingenious stroke -- they defined minorities as slovenly criminals, they define liberal Democrats as "soft on crime", and they allowed themselves the freedom to place these thoughts in the American psyche without having to substantiate their facts. Moreover, they accomplish all this in every sound bite, and without seeming to be racist, with the use of just one word, "liberal." In fact, conservatives have been so thorough in their disparagement of liberalism that at this point the word "liberal" is treated like vulgarity, and simply referred to as "the L word."

One would think that Democrats would be up in arms in defense of their liberal tradition. It would seem that they would be falling all over one another in an attempt to debate this issue. But instead, these people are falling over one another trying to put distance between themselves and the liberal tradition. Where are their backbones? Where is that one Democrat willing to say, wait a minute! Read your history! It was the "bleeding heart liberal" policies of Franklin Delano Roosevelt that brought this country back from the brink of disaster.

*******

In 1921 -- eight years before the great depression -- Republicans took over the helm of this nation for 12 years. During that time there were three Republican administrations, the first of which was the administration of Warren G. Harding. History remembers Harding's administration for one thing more than anything other -- scandal. It was during Harding's presidency that the Teapot Dome Scandal erupted. His administration was considered the most corrupt administration in the history of the United States -- until Nixon's, then Reagan's, and finally Bush's.

Next, in 1923, came Calvin Coolidge, the president that Ronald Reagan is said to have most admired. Coolidge's policies of large tax cuts, allowing business a free-rein, and his encouragement of stock speculation contributed greatly to the impending stock market crash and the great depression that was to come.

Then in 1929 Herbert Hoover came to power. During his administration the stock market crashed, starting the great depression. In spite of the fact that by 1933 the unemployment rate was at 33.3% with 16 million people out of work, the Republican, Hoover, just sat, thinking that the economy would eventually rejuvenate itself. During Hoover's administration 15,000 WWI veterans marched on Washington demanding that they be paid what they were owed by the government. Hoover responded by calling in federal troops to throw these ex-servicemen off government property.

Finally in 1933 Franklin Delano Roosevelt, a liberal democrat, was elected overwhelmingly. He immediately surrounded himself with a group of the finest minds in the country, including Columbia professors Adolph A. Berle, Jr., Rexford G. Tugwell, and Raymond Moley, known at the time as the "Brain Trust." After assembling these men and others he went about the business of developing a" New Deal" for the working class people of this country.

The New Deal had two components -- one to help the economy to recover from the effects of the great depression, and a second component to give relief to the American people and to insure that they were never be placed in a position of total destitution again. To help heal the economy Roosevelt created programs that regulated business, controlled inflation, and brought about price stabilization; to bring relief to the people he signed The National Labor Relations Act which guaranteed workers the right to collective bargaining, and he created the Social Security Administration to guarantee workers some sort of income once they became too old to work. He also signed the Fair Labor Standards Act which protected workers rights and set a minimum wage for workers.

With his New Deal in place Franklin Delano Roosevelt, this "bleeding heart liberal", not only led this country out of the worst, Republican generated, crisis that this country has ever faced, but went on to lead the free world in victory over Hitler in WWII. He then ushered in the most sustained prosperity that the world has ever known.

One would think that conservatives would have seen the light, but their passion to further enrich the wealthy at the expense of the middle and lower classes seems to supersede all logic. Therefore, from the moment that the New Deal went into place, conservatives have been determined to dismantle it. The closest they've come to succeeding started during the Reagan administration with Supply-Side Economics, or, "Reaganomics" -- and the battle is currently raging in Washington D.C. as we speak.

Supply- Side Economics was a scheme hatch by U.S.C. economist Arthur Laffer and the Reagan crowd which was supposed to cut the deficit and balance the budget. The theory behind Reaganomics was ostensibly, if you cut taxes for business and people in the upper tax brackets, and then deregulated business of such nuisances as safety regulations and environmental safeguards, the beneficiaries would invest their savings into creating new jobs. In that way the money would eventually "trickle down" to the rest of us. The resulting broadened tax base would not only help to bring down the deficit, but also subsidize the tremendously high defense budget. When the plan was first floated, even George Bush, Reagan's vice president to be, called it "voodoo economics."

Reaganomics, for the most part, sought to undo many of the safeguards put into place during the Roosevelt era and create a business environment similar to that which was in place during the Coolidge Administration. What actually took place, however, was even more like the Coolidge era than planed.

 Instead of taking the money and investing it into creating new jobs, the money was used in wild schemes and stock market speculation. One of these schemes, the leveraged buy out, involved buying up large companies with borrowed funds secured by the company's assets, then paying off the loan by selling off the assets of the purchased company. This practice cost the citizens of this country its industrial base. In addition, the bottom fell out of the stock market. On Monday, October 19, 1987 the Dow-Jones Average fell 508.32 points. It was the greatest one-day decline since 1914 - 15 years before the Great Depression.

And what about Ronald Reagan's promise to balance the budget and lower the deficit? By the time he left office he was not only the most prolific spender of any president, but he also added more to the deficit than all of the other presidents from George Washington to his own administration combined. And what does the Republican Party propose to do about that? One of the Republican proposals was their "contract with America," a capitol gains tax cut -- for the rich.

Due to the continued freewheeling fiscal policies of conservative Republicans, between 1986 and 1989, spanning the presidencies of Reagan and Bush Sr., the FSLIC had to pay off all the depositors of 296 institutions with assets of over $125 billion.

Then in 1988 Silverado Savings and Loan collapsed, costing the taxpayers $1.3 billion. It was headed by Neil Bush, brother of George W. The investigation alleged that he was guilty of "breaches of his fiduciary duties involving multiple conflicts of interest." The issue was eventually settled out of court with Bush paying a mere $50,000 settlement.

Then there was the Lincoln Savings and loan scandal in 1987, involving John McCain. The scandal was very similar to the one that is currently playing out on Wall Street. He was one of a group of senators dubbed "The Keating Five" involved in a scandal by the same name.

In 1976 Charles Keating moved to Arizona to run the American Continental Corporation. In 1984, shortly after the Reagan era push to deregulate the savings and loan community, Keating bought Lincoln Savings and Loan and began to engage in highly risky investments with the depositors' savings. In 1989 the parent company, which Keating headed, went bankrupt, and it resulted in over 21,000 investors losing their life savings. Most of the investors were elderly, and the loss amounted to about 285 million dollars.

After having received over a million dollars from Keating in illegal campaign contributions, gifts, free trips, and other gratuities, the Keating Five--Senators John Glenn, Don Riegle, Dennis DeConini, Alan Cranston, and Sen. John McCain--attempted to intervene in the investigation into Keating's activities by the regulators. Later, they were admonished to varying degrees by the senate for attempting to influence regulators on Keating's behalf. Charles Keating ended up being convicted for fraud, racketeering and conspiracy, for which he received 10 years by the state court, and a 12 year sentence in federal court. After spending four and a half years in prison, his convictions were overturned. But prior to being retried, he pled guilty to a number of felonies in return for a sentence of time served.

Then came the George W. Bush administration that caused close to a million people to die uselessly in an illegal war in Iraq, robbed the American people blind, whose fumbling ignited the longest war in American history in Afghanistan, and whose greed came very close to sending the nation into yet another depression.

Now, after all of their repeated efforts to deplete the national treasury, they're unanimously voting against every piece of legislation that the Democrats propose to repair the damage they created, and to bring relief to the American people. Then they have the audacity to claim that they're doing it because they're concerned about deficit spending.

They're against affordable health care for American families; they're against any kind of spending to put Americans back to work, and they're against extending unemployment insurance to relieve the burden of America's unemployed. What's particularly telling, however, is they're also against any kind of strong legislation to prevent the financial community (them) from being able to rob the American people in the future.

The fact is, what they really want is to maintain the status quo, and make damn sure that the American people suffer until the 2012 elections so they'll have a chance to regain power and raid the treasury again. That's their one and only agenda - period.

History is clear. The conservative Republicans don't mind spending money, they just don't want to spend it on those who need it -- us. Remember, they're the party of Alexander Hamilton, one of this country's founding fathers who believed that only those who owned property should even be allowed to vote. He also said:

"All communities divide themselves into the few and the many. The first are the rich and wellborn, the other the mass of the people.... The people are turbulent and changing; they seldom judge or determine right. Give therefore to the first class a distinct, permanent share in government. They will check the unsteadiness of the second, and as they cannot receive any advantage by a change, they therefore will ever maintain good government." Debates of the Federalist Convention (May 14-September 17, 1787).

So, let's set the record straight. Franklin Delano Roosevelt, that "bleeding heart liberal", not only brought the nation back from the Great Depression and saved the world from Hitler during his life, but his "New Deal" for the American people gave us the greatest prosperity we've ever known, and allowed him to reach back from the grave to save the nation from Ronald Reagan 50 years after his death.

That isn't to say that the liberal Democratic philosophy corners the market on what is in the best interest of the nation -- it is clear that both parties have had illustrious moments in the past -- but rather, this is one of those defining issues in American politics that determines whether this is to be a government of the people, by the people, and for the people, or a government where the citizens or nothing more than disposable resources for big business.

In the past the Democratic Party has always been there to draw a line in the sand on this issue, but in recent history the liberal philosophy has been distorted to the point that even Democrats are distancing themselves from their own political philosophy.

But what makes America great, are those dramatic moments in American politics when that one individual has the courage to put everything on the line to defend, protect, and save the American people from disaster. And the annals of modern American history will clearly show that during those moments, it was a "bleeding heart liberal" that stepped up to the plate. First FDR, then Bill Clinton, and now Barack Hussein Obama.

Thus, future historians will record that there is nothing more honorable in American politics than a bleeding heart . . .  because their hearts bleed for America.

Now if we can just find a few.

Eric L. Wattree
wattree.blogspot.com
Ewattree@Gmail.com

Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.

Sphere: Related Content

Gross Hypocrisy: The Greatest Threat to American Security

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE

Gross Hypocrisy: The Greatest Threat to American Security

As the mainstream media continues to engage in its endless distraction over Senator Harry Reid stating the ridiculously obvious, New York's Black Star News is running an otherwise completely overlooked little story about the firing of Eric Amankwah, a 28-year-old Ghanian, by Delta Airlines for reporting a serious breach of security.

Amanakwah alleges that on January 2, a mere eight days after the Christmas Day attempt on Flight 253 over Detroit, he was instructed by his supervisor, Yvonne Green, to circumvent JFK security and deliver an unattended suitcase to an out-going flight without inspection. When he protested over the breach of security, he was advised by Ms. Green that he shouldn't worry about it. It was done routinely. If the suitcase missed its connection Delta Airlines would be fined.

After carrying out Green's instructions, when Amanakwah returned Green was waiting for him with a second supervisor, Mohammad Taj, to which Ms. Green reported, "Eric completed the job." Taj then said, "Good," then left.

According to the Black Star article by Milton Allimadi, after discussing the matter with other Delta employees, Mr. Amanakwah began to have second thoughts about what he had been instructed to do, so he sent an e-mail up Delta Airline's chain of command, including one to Delta's CEO, Richard H. Anderson, expressing his concern over the matter. The following Tuesday he was fired.

Black Star News followed up on the story by publishing a request for any other airline employees with similar stories of security breaches to come forward. In response they were contacted by Ms. Mary Stewart-Joyce. She indicated that she was hired by Delta Airlines on May 8, 1997. She goes on to say:

"After completion of the new hire training I was assigned to the Federal Inspections Area at JFK. The lead supervisors were Mavis Thomas, Joseline Lucas, Alix Laincy and Danny Cronin: Mr. Cronin was my assigned supervisor.

"I was not signed up for the Port Authority security class and therefore was forced to work in FIS without the proper Port ID pass. This was a violation of Federal Law. I was told to turn my building access swipe card around and to wear it lengthwise behind my Delta ID so that it would 'look' as if I had a port ID."

Ms. Joyce indicated that she was finally sought out and detained by the customs office for failing to have the proper I.D. She was informed by the customs officer that they were told to find her on the floor and hold her so that Delta Airlines could be fined for breaching security. Later she was informed by a customs supervisor that he was the one who had ordered her picked up and held because he was "sick of Delta's total disregard for security."

Ms. Joyce goes on to relate other breaches by Delta Airlines. She says that she knew many of the things that she was instructed to do were a breach of security, but there was very little that she could do about it, because as a single mother, she feared termination. But at this point, she says, she's not only willing to come forward, but sign a deposition.

As dangerous as this kind of irresponsible behavior is to the flying public, the arrogance of corporate, social, and political entitlement represent a much greater danger to America as a whole. Gross hypocrisy and the entitlement of power have become indelibly ingrained in the very fabric of America. That makes lying, deceit, and the routine manipulaion of the American people just a simply matter of doing  business, by both corporations and government alike.

What's in the best interest of the American people has become secondary to the corporate pursuit of the dollar.  This fact is clearly demonstrated by this multi billion-dollar airline's willingness to put the lives of its passengers in jeopardy just to avoid a fine that amounts to pennies. And many of the government officials that we depend on to protect us are just as corrupt. Washington has become filled with politicians elected to represent the people, who have become nothing short of government-paid lobbyists for big business - Joe Lieberman is an obvious case in point. He's willing to throw 67% of his constituents under the bus for his own personal gain.

So while Al Qaeda undoubtedly poses a threat to America, it doesn't come close to the threat posed  by the corruption, self-service, and total disregard of American ideals by the ever-growing bunch of demagogues that we've casually allowed to gain control of our lives - and even as I write this sentence it's becoming progressively worse. They've seized control of the media, virtually destroyed our educational system, and have left us all but helpless to even grasp what's happening to us.

America needs to understand that the time to become actively engaged in our own welfare has all but passed. We're already waste-deep in a class war. Hyperbole? Just take a moment to consider how far we've declined since WWII.

They tell us we're involved in a "war on terror."  But who's fighting that war, and making all of the sacrifices? When America went to war during WWII, all of America was at war - the rich and poor, Black and White, young and old. But now, the only ones sacrificing for this so-called "war on terror" are the poor and middle-class. The rich hopes it goes on forever, because they're benefitting from it greatly.

Then they tell us, "Oh, no! It only looks unfair. The difference between now and WWII is that now we have a 'volunteer military'."

'Volunteer military?'  Let's take a look at that: Our so-called 'volunteers' are made up of poor and middle-class young people who are there in lieu of a job so they can try to get an education, or feed and insure their young families. One volunteers as an act of patriotism, not as an attempt to survive.

Clear evidence of my contention is the enlistment rate of the rich. If our 'volunteer military' is indeed built upon patiotism, the children of the rich certainly can't have much love for America, because they're volunteering in piss-poor numbers. As a direct result of the poor enlistment rate of the rich and privileged, our troops have to take up the slack by placing their lives on the line for two, three, and four tours of combat duty - then these very same slackers are reluctant, and even resistant, to enhance military benefits, even as they pay the personnel of their contractor cronies three and four times what they pay our troops.

Thus, calling our troops 'volunteers' is no more accurate than calling your trash man a volunteer. He didn't volunteer to collect the trash. He's doing the very same thing as our brave troops in Afghanistan and Iraq, simply trying to feed his family. He just doesn't have to die to do it.

So America needs to wake up before it's too late. We're no longer living in the America we once knew. We're not safe; we can no longer trust what's in our food and water; our young people are being taught that it's 'un-American' to put family before corporate profit; and the country is brimming over with demagogues, tycoons, and self-serving politicians having wet dreams over the prospect of personal windfall - in both money and power - of another attack on America.

There's a reason why Cheney continues to insist that President Obama say "War" when he mentions terror -  because "war" means money.

Correction

I was contacted by Ms. Mary Stewart-Joyce regarding this story. She indicated that she wasn't actually detained by the customs officer for not having the proper I.D. She was warned by the official that they had been instructed to locate her on the floor without the proper I.D. so Delta Airlines could be fined. Thereafter, she took it upon herself to sit out the remainder of her shift in the Arrival Control Office.


Eric L. Wattree
wattree.blogspot.com

Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.

Sphere: Related Content

Healthcare: There was a 3 a.m. Call to the White House, and No One Answered

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE

Healthcare: There was a 3 a.m. Call to the White House, and No One Answered

President Obama is in trouble. How do I know? Because as one of his biggest supporters, even I'm beginning to wonder if I got too caught up in the hype. While I'm still excited over the historic significance of his presidency, the gathering threat that he may be remembered as an ineffectual kiss-up to the Republican Party is beginning to tarnish its luster.

That should come as very bad news to the president, because if a supporter of my unfettered loyalty has begun to wonder about him, that means that tens of millions of others are thinking along the same lines. And based on his atrocious handling of both the Republican Party and the healthcare debate, he only has himself to blame.

In the real world, it's not enough to have good ideas and the eloquence to express them, one must also have the backbone to wield power in order to bring those ideas to fruition - that's the reason for seeking power in the first place. But the president doesn't seem to have the capacity to do that - wield power, that is. He seems to yearn for a utopia in America where everybody is holding hands singing Kumbaya. We need a little realism here - make that, a lot of realism.

The president seems to harbor this burning desire to be loved by everyone. If that's all he wanted he should have become an entertainer instead of a politician. In politics, the people are looking for a father figure who is fair, but also bad enough to protect them from harm, and President Obama is not demonstrating that capacity. In fact, from what he's shown so far, he seems to be more adept at taking the coward's way out. Everyone knows the type - the kind of guy that's always running up to the bullies trying to become their best friend so they won't get beat up.

No one wants a president like that, no matter how much they like him. The people want someone that makes them feel secure and protected. Sure, Obama is very intellectual and contemplative, but you can't think your way out of an ass wiping when a bully's determined to do it - I know that for a fact, because I've tried it with very little success.

The irony of Obama's presidency is that if he fails in his first term - and if he continues the way he is, he will - it's not going to be because he wasn't cultured enough, or intellectual enough, but because he's not ghetto enough. Just turn on your television and try to find a show without someone being busted in the head. You can't do it, because Americans respect people who are willing to fight for what they believe in.

If he had just a little more ghetto in him he would have thrown Lieberman to the wolves thirty seconds after he took the oath of office. If he'd done that, the other Liebercrats who are currently blocking healthcare reform would have had second thoughts about the consequences of bucking his initiatives. Americans don't want to be led by Jimmy Stewart; they want John Wayne, a benevolent bully.

The people want the kind of president who's willing to tell congress what he wants, draw a line in the sand, then make it clear to every legislator that they buck the will of the American people at their own peril - then setup a special task force in the White House dedicated to nothing but educating the people with facts and figures about the self-serving motives of the legislators trying to circumvent their will.

Why shouldn't the people know about the connection that Joe Lieberman and his wife have with the insurance industry? Provide the people with that information, then let him go before the cameras and try to look sincere. If the White House had that kind of operation, Liebercrats and Republicans alike would have to check their closets before they decided to buck the president.

But instead, Obama's acting like that Black cop that we in the Black community know so well - the one who's so sensitive about being accused of coddling Black people that he goes out of his way to be more insensitive than his colleagues. That's exactly what Obama is doing to his base. He's so fixated on appeasing the Republican base that he seems to be totally ignoring his own. As a result, he's turning a blind eye to why he was voted into office in the first place.

But what's so unfathomable is that as intelligent as Barack Obama is, he seems to be forgetting that, unlike that Black cop, he has to come back to the community to be reelected - and if he doesn't spend the next three years undoing the damage that he's done to his image, never mind the possibility of losing to a Republican, he may even lose the right to run again in the primaries.

The president seems to working under the assumption that being an aggressive advocate for the people is bad politics, so he's adopted a strategy of trying to win by not losing. That explains why he's pointedly avoided specifically identifying what he wants in a healthcare bill. He seems to feel that by drawing a line in the sand, every element of the bill that's shot down thereafter constitutes a personal lost to him.

The fact is, that's true, but that's what's called having the courage of your convictions. That's why you fight, and fight hard. But he seems to have adopted a strategy of if I don't fight, I won't have to bear the embarrassment of losing, which by definition, fails the people who elected him.

This is not the time to indulge in political vanity - save that for the next election season. This is where the rubber meets the road. Now's the time to put all the pretty rhetoric aside and fight for the people who believed in him, and gave him their vote in the belief that he would fight to protect their interest. But I'm very sorry to say, that he's failing to do that, to the sincere disappoint of millions. He promised "a change that we can believe in," but what we're getting is the same old status quo that we thought we voted out of fashion - politicians first, then the people . . . maybe.

Mr. President, I have never dreaded writing any article more than I have this one. All of my instincts are screaming for me to hang in there with you, but the facts won't allow it. Every time I go to write a sentence trying to justify you're actions, I think about an email that I received from a young lady regarding my column. She simply said, "I really hope you're researching the stuff you say in your column, because I don't know much about politics, so I rely on you for my information." So while I would love to give you the benefit of the doubt, Mr. President, my first loyalty must be to people like that young lady.

So, you need to man up, Mr. President, as we say in the 'hood. You're looking weak and indecisive: You're allowing people from your own party to thumb their noses at you, you're putting thirty thousand of our troops in harms way in order to chase one hundred Eastside Crips in Afghanistan, and you're fighting to pass a healthcare bill that forces the public to by in, but without a public option. That, in essence, constitutes paying a windfall ransom to the insurance industry in order to protect your image.

But you still have time to change your course of action. You have nothing to lose, and everything to gain. The Republicans are not going to like you regardless to what you do, but by deciding to go for broke in defense of the American people you might still have time to salvage your image in the eyes of your base.

But your window of opportunity is very narrow indeed. At the rate your image has declined in this first year since you took office, if you don't do something fast - and I mean very fast - by this time next year you're gonna be typecasted as a weak and ineffectual president, both at home and abroad. At that point you'll be no more than a caretaker for the next two years until you can be voted out of office. Because believe me, none of your base, including myself, is going to support having a president kiss up to the Republicans for another four years.

Mr. President, I'm convinced that you're a good, intelligent, and well-meaning man so I'm still pulling for you. But what I've related to you here is what many of us call, the actual factuals.


Eric L. Wattree
wattree.blogspot.com

Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.

Sphere: Related Content

The Filibuster: A Platform for Prima Donnas to Obstruct Democracy

BENEATH THE SPIN • ERIC L. WATTREE The Filibuster: A Platform for Prima Donnas to Obstruct Democracy It's time to get rid of the filibuster in the United States Senate. The filibuster is a senate rule where if there is less than sixty votes on any issue, any one senator can hold up the people's business by blocking the issue from coming to a vote before the full senate. The movie "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington," with Jimmy Stewart, portrays the practice in its most charitable light. There, Jimmy Stewart's character uses the filibuster to prevent legislation from being enacted against the people by a corrupt political machine. But in reality, the filibuster is virtually always used to obstruct legislation beneficial to the people in favor of a corrupt or malevolent status quo. In 1957 Sen. Strum Thurmond (Sen., S.C.) filibustered to obstruct the 1957 Civil Rights Act. Then in 1964 a group of Southern senators mounted a filibuster in an attempt to obstruct a vote on the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which included anti lynching legislation. And just recently Sen. Joe Lieberman threatened to filibuster to prevent healthcare legislation from coming to a vote in order to protect the greed of the insurance industry - and that was in spite of the fact that a full 68% of the people who voted him into office stood firmly in favor of healthcare reform. The filibuster is symbolic of the many ways that Americans are being manipulated by the encroachment of an increasingly insidious class system. Thus, the time has long since past for the American people to rediscover the necessity of keeping tight reins on governmental power. It is absolutely incumbent upon us to strip individual politicians of the tools to hold badly needed legislation hostage for their own personal interest. Not only is it undemocratic to allow one senator to override the will of the people and the majority of the senate, but recent history has clearly demonstrated that politicians are much too self-serving, irresponsible, and corrupt to be vested with such tremendous power. In an article in Slate.com, it was pointed out that Joe Lieberman's opposition to healthcare reform came only one day after the insurance lobby released a report attacking it. Slate also pointed out that Lieberman's home state of "Connecticut is home to 72 insurance companies, including Aetna, a major player in the health-insurance industry whose PAC and employees have this year given Lieberman $65,200." As a result, Lieberman didn't blink an eye before throwing his constituents under the bus. So while Joe Lieberman didn't follow through with his threat to filibuster healthcare legislation, it certainly wasn't because he prayed over the issue and suddenly found God. Lieberman didn't follow through with his threat for the very same reason that seems to generally motivate his machinations - self-interest. First, he wants to keep his chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee in the senate, which the Democrats allowed him to keep even after he turned on them in the 2008 election. And secondly, the pressure for him to fall into line became much too intense for his cowardly heart to take. His threat to filibuster the legislation was designed to pull other Democrats onboard, but when he failed to do so, he lacked the character to stand alone. President Eisenhower pointed out in his speech on the military/industrial complex that "Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together [emphasis added]." That also applies to every other area of American governance. But due to the under funding and concerted attack on our educational system, we're rapidly losing that essential characteristic, which is absolutely necessary to maintain the viable democracy that was established by this nation's founders. Over the years America has become increasingly hostile toward education and the pursuit of knowledge in general. In fact, many of our politicians have started to actively demonize education in much the same way that they demonized the term "liberal" in the sixties. The educated members of our society are now often referred to as "elitist." The hostility of our politicians toward education stems from the fact that the demagoguery of control and manipulation cannot thrive in a knowledgeable society. A knowledgeable society would immediately recognize that one man should not be able to obstruct public policy. So they've mounted a brutal attack on our educational system by trying to starve it to death. Those who are entrusted with the nation's most valuable asset - the intellectual development of our nation's youth - are denigrated, paid like paupers, and relegated to among the lowest tiers of our society, when they should be at the top. And while other countries are guaranteeing a higher education to all who are qualified, the children of the poor and middle class in the United States are being arrested for demonstrating against college tuition being raised far beyond their ability to pay. This is not by accident. Our educational system is being purposely undermined so the American people can be easily trained, like Pavlov's dog, to respond to emotional cues rather than rational thought. In that way, corporate manipulators like Joe Lieberman, Fox News, and the Republican Party are left to define, for the people, what's in their best interest. It allows the likes of Rush Limbaugh or a Glen Beck to instruct them in when it's appropriate to become outraged. That leaves the nation in a very precarious position, because now, instead of loving America, and American ideals, the people have been conditioned to vest their love and loyalty in individuals. We currently see the effect of that in the people's response to Sarah Palin on the right, and President Obama on the left. While certaintly not equating the president with Sarah Palin, the point is, many people have confused their love for individuals with patriotism, and the character of that "patriotism" is determined by the character of the individual. That's extremely dangerous, especially since these people lack the education to reflect back on WWII. The problem is, in order for American citizens to truly love America, they have to know what it is about America that's worth loving. But due to the attack on our educational system, we've spawned a generation of Americans who know absolutely nothing about American traditions, nor ideals. That's why they so easily accept torture, and the invasion of privacy as though it's business as usual. That's also why they so casually accept the fact that there's a class of people who are obviously above the law. That's what they see in American life, and they have no other frame of reference or educational background to inform them that having a class above the law is un-American. As a result, we have a constant chipping away of American values. While part of President Eisenhower's warning was "make no assumptions," those of us who do have a knowledge of American ideals have made the false assumption that a knowledge of America's traditions are so fundamental that it's common to all Americans. But the fact is, it's not. There's a large segment of our population who don't know what it means to be an American. Thus, it's not necessary for corporate controllers to take away our rights, we've become so ignorant as a people that we're fighting one another to give them away - and don't make the mistake of thinking that applies to only the least of us. Our military personnel all get a crash course in what it means to be an American, but what of the corporate and political class? The politicians tell us that we're at war. That used to mean that the entire country pulled together to sacrificed equally to defeat the enemy. But how many sons and daughters of the political or corporate class have died in this war? That's right - not one. Yeah, I know. We have a volunteer army. But if America is in such a life and death struggle, why aren't the rich and political class urging their children to volunteer in the name of patriotism? I'll tell you why - because the pride of the founding fathers has become so remote that the rich and powerful now see patriotism as pedestrian. These people have learned from their parents - Dick Cheney, for example - that the pride of patriotism is nothing more than a tool to manipulate the masses. Why isn't the super-patriotic Liz Cheney driving a truck in Iraq? The simple answer is, because she sees it as beneath her station. She feels that there are "little people" to do that sort of thing. Her job is to be a cheerleader. Thus, we've become the victims of our own ignorance, and it's time to set that straight before it's too late. And the only way that we can restore ourselves as "we the people," is by reasserting ourselves over the lofty and arrogant by stripping then of their political power. And the very first step in that process should be regaining control of congress, and stripping these prima donnas of the right to filibuster the will of the American people. 　 Eric L. Wattree wattree.blogspot.com   Religious bigotry: It's not that I hate everyone who doesn't look, think, and act like me - it's just that God does.

Sphere: Related Content