George W. Obama: Commander of the Left-Right Dystopia
By Max Eternity
Adhering strictly to existing paradigms that define social order, like black and white, democrat and republican, Jew and Gentile or liberal and conservative, for instance, is not always helpful when trying to comprehend an unwieldy sociopolitical problem. As in our current sociopolitical climate, these paradigms only serve to conceal the fact that George W. Bush and Barack Obama have successfully put in place corporate governance that best serves those on high, while masquerading as a responsible and noble democracy; representing justice for all, especially those most vulnerable.
Dr. Cornel West explained his observation of the left-right dilemma to me when we spoke in 2011, and I inquired as to why America has yet to see Obama make a significant departure from Bush, thus becoming more like President Roosevelt. West replied saying it’s because “there is a deficit of courage in the culture, where everybody is up for sale.… you have a right wing party…that you basically buy…you have a centrist-right party you basically buy…it’s like choosing between a left wing and right wing version of Jim Crow…what you gon’ do?”
“Is Barack Obama a Republican Realist?” is the title of an article published at the American Conservative, and has a byline that reads “[h]is foreign policy recalls George H.W. Bush—and his domestic policy could be Ike’s or Nixon’s.” Obama likes to think of himself as being more like Abraham Lincoln, but curiously in the article no comparison to Lincoln was ever made.
The last sentence of the article calls out the hybridized George W. Obama elephant-in-the-room, saying “Obama, in short, is not a socialist or a even a social-democrat, just a good old centrist Republican.”
In a piece published on March 21st, the president and publisher of Harpers Magazine, John R. MacArthur, wrote that Obama “never stops serving the ruling class.” Though, whether “left or right,” MacArthur says, the mainstream media continues “to pretend” that Obama is a “reincarnation of Franklin D. Roosevelt…committed to the downtrodden and deeply hostile to the privileged and the rich.”
It simply does not add up, and MacArthur sees right through the Obama’s-a-socialist double speak, saying “as a student of propaganda and politics, I can’t help but remark on how effective Obama has been at muzzling criticism, or even intelligent analysis, from the liberals.” Furthermore, he calls out the Obama “socialist, liberal” fallacy in his editorial, saying:
The president’s double game was never more adroit than during his most recent State of the Union address. Reacting to the speech, the right-wing columnist Charles Krauthammer spoke on Fox News of Obama’s “activist government” beliefs and his penchant for “painting the Republicans as the party of the rich” while portraying himself as the defender of the “middle class, Medicare and all this other stuff.” Meanwhile, the “liberal” New York Times praised his “broad second-term agenda” as “impressive” and blamed the G.O.P. for “standing in the way” of the many liberal reforms that the president supposedly wants to enact to help the poor and the middle class.
On the issue of Guantamo, Obama continues to echo Bush and the republicans, and just last week it was reported that Department of Defense officials are downplaying the ongoing and “[g]rowing Guantanamo Hunger Strike With Bush-Era Talking Points.”
In the video below, Michael Rattner—the attorney for Julian Assange, who is also co-counsel for the Guantanamo detainees now on hunger strike—illustrates why and how:
[vsw id=”qTpsysUOqoM” source=”youtube” width=”425″ height=”344″ autoplay=”no”]
It’s hypocritical, and like Rattner, John W. Whitehead doesn’t mince words in upholding the law. Whitehead is an attorney and author specializing in constitutional law. He was co-counsel to Paula Jones in her sexual harassment lawsuit against President Clinton, and Whitehead has gone on to continue to defending women’s rights. In a March 2013 editorial at the Rutherford Institute—a civil liberties organization that provides free legal services to those needing protection of their constitutional and human rights—Whitehead slams Obama’s attorney general, Eric Holder, on his misuse of the legal system in order to shield the president from accountability, saying in part that:
No better example is there of the perversion of the office of the AG than its current occupant Eric Holder, who was appointed by President Obama in 2009. Hailed by civil liberties and watchdog groups alike for his pledge to “reverse the disastrous course that we have been on over the past few years” and usher in a new era of civil liberties under Obama, Holder has instead carried on the sorry tradition of his predecessors, going to great lengths to “justify” egregious government actions that can only be described as immoral, unjust and illegal.
The junior Bush’s tax cuts are one of the most defining aspects to his White House tenure. Arguing on their behalf, Bush claimed the infamous tax cuts were good for the economy—benefiting all Americans. What has redundantly come to light, however, is that Bush’s tax policies primarily benefited the wealthy, and very wealthy. From the Washington Post, a January 2013 article on the WONKBLOG says “as the top tax rates are reduced, the share of income accruing to the top of the income distribution increases — that is, income disparities increase.” The article says, as well, that Bush’s tax cuts are the main thing that “drove the deficit.”
Julian Zelizer is a professor of history and public affairs at Princeton University, and wrote this year in an article for CNN that Obama “had promised to overturn a [tax] policy that he saw as regressive…Obama criticized Bush for pushing…policies that bled the federal government of needed revenue and benefited the wealthy.” Zelizer says that in 2010 “Obama agreed to temporarily extend all the tax cuts…and he seemed to agree with Republicans that reversing them would hurt an economy limping along after a terrible recession.”
For someone who has been often characterized by Republicans as a socialist, isn’t it bizarre that Obama endorsed Bush’s tax policies?
Much of the same continues on in 2013, with Obama’s January signing of the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, effectively preventing Bush’s “temporary” tax cuts from automatically expiring.
As I recently wrote at Truthout in an article about poverty, for more than a decade Americans have been creeping closer and closer to being ensnared in a downward trend toward less wealth, less freedom and educational opportunities. In spite of this, Americans still want and deserve a just and transparent democracy.
Americans want peace and prosperity, not endless wars and entitlements for the super-rich, or leaders who promise one thing, but deliver the opposite. And for those honest and unbiased, this should hold true for democrats, republicans, and all others politically affiliated or not.