Barack Obama: Kind and Gentle Warrior

Barack Obama gets a free pass for his war mongering, even from the political left, as described by Glenn Greenwald:

Most Democrats are perfectly aware of Obama’s military aggression. They don’t support him despite that, but rather, that’s one of the things they love about him. After years of being mocked by the Right as Terrorist-coddling weaklings, Obama — strutting around touting his own strength — lets them feel strong and powerful in exactly the way that Bush and Cheney’s swaggering let conservatives prance around as tough-guy, play-acting warriors. Rather than ignore this aggression, Democratic think tanks point with beaming pride to the corpses piled up by the Democratic Commander-in-Chief to argue that he’s been such a resounding foreign policy “success,” while Democratic pundits celebrate and defend the political value of his majestic kills.

Continue ReadingBarack Obama: Kind and Gentle Warrior

Obama lapses

I voted for Barack Obama. I was convinced (and I still am convinced) that he was a much better candidate than John McCain. But I also recognize that Barack Obama is a President with massive flaws. See, for example, the many items on these lists. Not that I agree with everything on the the following lists. Not that these lists include every reason I am disappointed with Barack Obama.

Continue ReadingObama lapses

Chris Hedges discusses our hollowed-out politics

At Truthdig, Chris Hedges notes that the modern version of politics refuses to publicly discuss specific problems and specific solutions. Instead, we chant words like “destiny,” “progress” and “change.” In the meantime, power continues to be wrested from the people and the politicians they think that they are empowering.

Every election cycle, our self-identified left dutifully lines up like sheep to vote for the corporate wolves who control the Democratic Party. It bleats the tired, false mantra about Ralph Nader being responsible for the 2000 election of George W. Bush and warns us that the corporate technocrat Mitt Romney is, in fact, an extremist. The extremists, of course, are already in power. They have been in power for several years. They write our legislation. They pick the candidates and fund their campaigns. They dominate the courts. They effectively gut regulations and environmental controls. They suck down billions in government subsidies. They pay no taxes. They determine our energy policy. They loot the U.S. treasury. They rigidly control public debate and information. They wage useless and costly imperial wars for profit. They are behind the stripping away of our most cherished civil liberties. They are implementing government programs to gouge out any money left in the carcass of America. And they know that Romney or Barack Obama, along with the Democratic and the Republican parties, will not stop them.
With the financial crisis continuing the spread across America and Europe, the centers of wealth can be expected to further assert their craving for more wealth, and they will resort to anything. We've already seen their tactics:
The most retrograde forces within the corporate state, such as the Koch brothers, will lavish racists, homophobes, demagogues, birthers, creationists and gun-carrying, flag-waving idiots with money once the political center crumbles.

Continue ReadingChris Hedges discusses our hollowed-out politics

NYT launches more ad hominem attacks against Julian Assange

You need to read the NYT's hatchet piece regarding Julian Assange to believe it. The writer, Alessandra Stanley, apparently has no idea how utterly sick the mainstream media is, including her precious employer, the NYT, which is significantly responsible for plunging the United States into a needless war in Iraq. Instead of showing some appreciation that Assange has used his new television show to provide meaningful dialogue with a significant world figure, Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, she repeatedly tries to draw attention to her own sense of superiority, ignoring the horrifically unjust treatment Assange has received on many fronts, especially from the United States. She blithely writes, citing no sources, that nowadays Assange "is most often portrayed as a nut job." She has no idea, and offers no appreciation for the mission of Wikileaks or for the personal sacrifice experienced by Mr. Assange. She should start with this list of the many accomplishments of Wikileaks. Then she should consider this presentation at this year's National Conference for Media Reform and this. Glenn Greenwald forcefully and precisely puts Stanley's piece in perspective:

Assange developed an alternative template to the corporate media — one that was far more independent of, and adversarial to, government power — and, in the process, produced more newsworthy scoops than all of them combined. As NYU Journalism Professor Jay Rosen once put it about WikiLeaks: “The Watchdog Press Died; We Have This Instead.” The mavens of that dead watchdog press then decided that they hated Assange and devoted themselves to demonizing and destroying him. That behavior makes someone a “nut job,” but it isn’t Assange.

More revealingly still: it is simply impossible to imagine The New York Times using the phrase “nut job” to describe how anyone who exercises actual power in Washington is “most often portrayed.” The same is true of the rank speculation Stanley invokes to imply — without having the slightest idea whether it’s true — that Assange “wore out his welcome” at his prior home: that sort of gossipy ignorance, designed to smear without any basis, would rarely make its way into an article about someone at the epicenter of America’s political class. That’s because American media outlets are eager to savage those who are outcasts in Washington, but unfailingly treat its most powerful figures with great reverence. Stanley may want to reflect on that the next time she seeks to portray some media outlet other than her own as a subservient tool of state propaganda.

Unlike Alessandra Stanley, Julian Assange is not beholden to a corporate master in disturbingly over-consolidated industry. And it shows. To be convinced, all you need to do is read Stanley's mocking article, then view Assange's focused and revealing interview of Hassan Nasrallah.

Continue ReadingNYT launches more ad hominem attacks against Julian Assange

Members of Congress stalking lobbyists

From NPR:

We imagine the lobbyist stalking the halls of Congress trying to use cash to influence important people. But it doesn't always work that way. Often, the Congressman is stalking the lobbyist, asking for money. Lawmakers of both parties need to raise millions of dollars per election cycle. So lobbyists get calls from lawmakers and their staffs all the time, inviting them to fundraisers, according to Jimmy Williams, a former lobbyist for the real estate industry.

Continue ReadingMembers of Congress stalking lobbyists