I truly don't.
Look, I think it was ballsy for him to approve the raid on bin Ladin's compound. He had to have known that a botched attempt would have probably cost him his job.
What I do not like about him is that he has not only taken no steps to dismantle the national security state we now live in, he has increased it. He could have vetoed the 2012 National Defense Authorization Act, the one with the GOP-inserted language that authorized the indefinite detention of American citizens for whatever reason suits the Fed's fancy. He didn't; he only added a vague and non-binding signing statement of "of course we'd never do this".
I find that wholly inexcusable for a man who once taught Constitutional Law. Yes, I know that first year law school Con Law doesn't get into the Bill of Rights, but I'd expect him to have a passing familiarity with it.[1]
I don't like that he has spent over three years trying to work with people who lure him in close and cock-punch him. He then gets up and does it again. I don't know if he is a born optimist, a fool or has a partial brain deficit.[2] Personally, I'd like to see a little more Harry Truman from Obama.
Part of the problem is that Obama, when it comes to dealing with Congress, is acting like the only responsible adult in the room. The Republicans have been behaving like spoiled children who, if they don't get everything they want, will quit the game and go home. Or, more sinisterly, they've been acting like terrorists, who have been more than willing to throw this country into default and depression if they don't get their way. So maybe he is doing the best he can, but I would still have rather seen more fight out of him.
I don't like that Obama has been playing more from the old DLC playbook than anything else. Yes, he ended "don't ask, don't tell".[3] He got the Ledbetter Pay Act passed. While the Affordable Health Care Act is pretty damn sucky and is more a gift to those rapacious bastards in the health insurance industry than anything else, he still got something through.
But the stimulus was too little and was effectively hamstrung by Republicans who didn't want to be seen as being totally obstructionist on boosting the economy, but they didn't want to do anything that might lead to a solid recovery. That's because the Republicans, in full-blown "Party First" mode, would rather see many more millions of workers out of jobs if that would win them an election.
I want to see him fight for us. I want to see him make the Republicans pay a dear price for being economic kidnappers.
I'm not holding my breath.
But may G-d help us if he loses to that team of the Corporate Robot and the Wisconsin Fibber which the GOP put on their ticket.
_______________________________________
[1] As for Republicans, they talk a great game about freedom, but you'll note that they are really vigorous at slashing freedom and liberty in almost all areas (excepting the 2nd Amendment). All you have to do is mutter phrases like "terrorism" and "homeland security" and those weak-brained fools, along with Democrats like "Traitor Joe" Lieberman would let the NSA put cameras in their homes.
[2] I'd say "retarded", but the last time I did that, I got all sorts of nasty emails.
[3] Contrary to conservative predictions, the armed forces have not crumbled.
The ones your girlfriends warned you about.
34 minutes ago
5 comments:
Regarding the police state shit... I keep telling myself that Obama knows something important. He knows that if he cuts one dollar from an intelligence budget, or pulls down one secret camera, or stops one unconstitutional spying program... and any American anywhere gets a hangnail from a terrorist...
I keep telling myself that he knows how the wingnuts would eat that up, and he'll put off the Bill of Rights until his final act.
" that team of the Corporate Robot and the Wisconsin Fibber which the GOP put on their ticket."
The Dynamic Duo of Duplicity.
Interesting post. While I support his reelection, I share some of your critiques of the President, particularly (as you note) in his use of the National Security State. And his efforts to cooperate with the wing-nuts, who predictably take advantage CAN be infuriatingly frustrating, though I can barely imagine how much harder it would have been to get ANYTHING done if he had acted more so as to deliberately antagonize them (and fed into the stupid but inevitable "angry black man" stereotype).
I'm not sure, though, that vetoing the NDAA (you know, the enabling legislation that provides funding for the Pentagon and all our military forces) in "a time of war" would have been politically feasible, however repellent the extra GOP-BS may have been. The wing-nut idiots trashed the reputation and were prepared to trash the full faith and credit of our country over a routine squabble over extending the debt ceiling (which, for anyone who STILL doesn't get it, NEEDED to be extended if only to cover the principal and interest on the spending that had ALREADY been done). It wouldn't be too hard to believe that those same uncompromising numb-nuts would also have held hostage the troops they claim to "support" (naturally, while blaming the President for their own intransigence).
Such a predicament would have almost certainly led to a "Constitutional crisis": ostensibly the President can't just spend the money, unless Congress first appropriates it. But I find it hard to imagine that President Obama would have left the troops in the field at risk - likely claiming that he had the power to do so in his capacity as Commander-in-Chief in wartime, he would have spent the money anyway. And if the Court upheld his authority to do such a thing, it could only be viewed as a further expansion of the very National Security State and "Imperial Presidency" ("Unitary Executive"?) which seems to concern us both. All told, I'd say he finessed it pretty slickly - maybe in the hope that restoring a sane Democratic majority in the not too distant future could reverse course before too much damage was done.
Under the circumstances, I'm just not sure I see what better choice he might have had - and I don't think the veto would have been it.
I don't think there's a chance in hell that he'll ever do such a thing. Obama is as much of a liar as the GOP's duo. If he'd done what he should have done, he would have paid a political price, but anyone who took the oath of office, and then has done what he has done, doesn't deserve a second term. Anyone who is going to effectively put our rights up for a vote isn't going to take a stand on anything, ever.
We must sow some confusion said the Liar to the Thief: http://empireofdirt77.blogspot.com/2012/09/we-must-sow-some-confusion-said-liar-to.html
Post a Comment