It happens time and again as America�s quadrennial campaigns
to gain residency at the imperial White House gather momentum. Although our
forever-cloned candidates, one for each of the two indistinct political
parties, are asked to address each and every issue of the day, soft-hearted -- or
perhaps civically-ignorant -- Americans that we are, we usually give candidates
a free pass, not forcing them to commit to any specific color in their answers,
true chameleons they are. And the press, with its own corporate mission,
self-preservation, plays the usual economic game in its key role of a pleasing
whore.
Progressives as well as many other change-clamoring
Americans, particularly legions of young college students -- many, first-time
presidential would-be voters -- volunteered to give this new political face of
great hope, a man articulating change with a great amount of credulity, the
reins of that sempiternal �lesser evil� party of peace-makers and lowly
economy�s downcasts. Of course, having reached that all important milestone
which assured him the backing of the Democratic Party, Barack Obama had few
options but to accept being placed in the waiting �golden stable� where he gets
new handlers claiming to have magical knowledge with which to plot how the
presidential race must be run, not to place . . . or to show, but to win.
So now that face of great hope has been lifted, not to
remove any wrinkles, young man that he is, but �to add� the necessary patriotic
wrinkles required to be acceptable to what the new handlers consider to be the
candidate�s initiation of trust from Middle-America, not a geographical
location but a state of mind: that non-existing, totally equivocated middle of
the road of an economically and morally decrepit, fading nation where the
imperialism-cancer is already hovering around stage IV having spread to many,
if not most, aspects of American life. This while flags wave high in glory, and
flag pins adorn the lapels of politicians and their brethren, our corps of
elite corporate crooks. Could it be that it isn�t change that Americans want . .
. only a return, by whatever means, to easy credit, low oil prices and
continuance of that fantasy dream of wealth as a birthright, or one created by
motivational charlatanry, rather than the product of one�s labor?
Obama�s hundred-eighty-degree turn from progressivism and
change should come as no surprise to those of us oft-scalded by American
fraudulent politics; although we cannot help but feel deep pain for our
idealist young people getting their initiation of fire. Obama is in the hands
of the handlers (visible and invisible) who require his adherence to flip-flop
ambidexterity about Iraq, NAFTA (North America Free Trade Association),
separation of church and state; and, recently, his unnecessary and obscene vote
in the Senate favoring more federal surveillance on the citizenry. One wonders
how Obama might have voted in 2002 on the Iraq resolution had he been then a
member of the Senate and not just an Illinois state politician.
If we add to all the above his recent, ceremoniously
recorded adhesion to AIPAC (Israel�s lobby) and his of-late windmill attitude
to just about anything and everything, one must ask, is there really much of a
difference between Barack Obama and John McCain? Well, age for one thing; and,
most definitely, brains. But as for everything else, including critical foreign
policy change, the two senators might have been birthed by the same mother as
non-identical twins.
Some people, who have followed Obama�s political evolution
since Hillary Clinton�s abdication of what she claimed to be her Democratic
Party throne, are quick to give him the benefit of the doubt, saying that once
he gets to the White House he�ll be his own man and his deeply imbedded
progressive ideas will take root. Fools we are . . . has that ever happened
before . . . well, in recent memory? Not a chance!
Even President Carter, as honorable a president as this
nation has ever had, found it necessary to bend later on in his administration
to the influence that the Miami Mafia (exiled Cubans) had on Florida politics. Castro�s
Cuba, or rather the apolitical Cubans on the Island, had to suffer the
consequences of America�s WIR (Weapons of Ill Resort): embargoes, economic
sanctions and other destructive, anti-people dirty tricks which are constantly
being performed secretly.
There are three key issues for Americans which overrule
everything else, issues that have been addressed with ignorance and/or
triviality by both Obama and McCain. They are: the complete overhaul of an
economy in shambles; the imperialistic treatment we give to our presence in
both the Middle East and Southwest Asia (Afghanistan, Iraq and the
military-infested waters of the Persian Gulf, for which a more apropos name
would be the Pentagulf); and our irreverent, imperialistic position towards
Russia. The latter, an issue which is not being played much by the American media
. . . but an issue that will come back for sure to haunt us . . . and hurt us. Unlike
Germany and Japan, Russia is not a defeated country . . . and to treat her with
triumphal disdain and bullyism could ultimately exact too high a price for the
United States.
Arsonist Bush may be lighting up more destructive fires
around the world, but no one hears either McCain or Obama speaking of putting
them out.
� 2008 Ben Tanosborn
Ben
Tanosborn, columnist, poet and writer, resides in Vancouver, Washington (USA),
where he is principal of a business consulting firm. Contact him at ben@tanosborn.com.