<HTML><HEAD><TITLE></TITLE>
<META content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv=Content-Type></HEAD>
<BODY dir=ltr bgColor=#ffffff text=#000000>
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<DIV>I think Obama is an opportunist who is out for himself and will work for or
on the behalf of anyone who he thinks will further his own personal political
career and economic agenda – now and in the future. If the elites, ruling
class, establishment, etc. were composed of the poor unwashed masses, he would
be putting forth their cause and interests. Who he happens to be
auditioning for is situational and depends on who is the flavor of the day;
whose interests he actually acts on behalf of is not who he necessarily has
auditioned for but who has the power, money, and influence to help him in
achieving his personal individual goals of career advancement, economic
security, and financial interests (either immediate or future). In Obama’s
case, he auditioned for the American public and the progressive community in
particular; once he got the job via election, he began to work for those who
could secure his personal goals of fame, fortune, and career advancement for
himself and his family – namely, the establishment corporate elites (since we
are now considering corporations as people) and not necessarily human
individuals who may serve as wealthy influential upper echelon cogs in the
various corporate organizations that structure the different industries which
make up the established engines of our society.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>As Andrew Hacker – a conservative Political Scientist from the late
1950’s and 1960’s – said, corporations as entities have a life of their own and
will continue under their own inertia independent of those who serve on their
boards of directors and executives or who are their stockholders. The
people who hold those positions are themselves merely well paid transient cogs
in the machine, who come and go without having any real substantive or major
impact on the operation and direction of the organization, similar to the lesser
paid employees or members of the organization or individual stockholders.
At a American Political Science Convention that I attended in the 1960, he
chastised his fellow political scientists for being much too responsible and
respectable to question and challenge the notion that people were actually in
control of corporations and corporate policies and actions and that real human
beings governed corporate entities or directed them. He asserted that, in
point of fact contrary to all appearances, it was increasingly becoming the case
that no body was in control or charge and that the corporate interests were not
tied to the interests of group of human beings when push came to shove but were
independent and self-perpetuating. He held that people were becoming
merely automatons (men in gray flannel suits) whose interests were to serve the
corporate organizations and the interests of those organizations. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I continue to remember Hacker’s assertions since they were so striking and
different than what everyone else was saying – especially given the fact that he
was a suit and tie button-down conservative who was debunking the contemporary
establishment myth of capitalist individualism and Horatio Alger. He also
noted that Horatio Alger happened to be assisted in pulling himself up by his
own boot straps by the fact that his father-in-law just happened to own the
factory. It was so refreshing that Hacker and his comments stick in my
mind and continue to present food for thought.</DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: none">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: #f5f5f5">
<DIV style="font-color: black"><B>From:</B> <A title=galliher@illinois.edu
href="mailto:galliher@illinois.edu">C. G. Estabrook</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, November 11, 2010 10:47 AM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=ls1000@live.com href="mailto:ls1000@live.com">Laurie
Solomon</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Cc:</B> <A title=peace-discuss@anti-war.net
href="mailto:peace-discuss@anti-war.net">Peace-discuss</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> Re: [Peace-discuss] Who's he working for?</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: #000000; FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: none">It's
the tiny American economic elite, whom he auditioned for. <BR><BR>"Dominant
social groups," if you're feeling sociological, or the "ruling class" if you
like the old-time religion. It's the same folks. <BR><BR>On
11/11/10 10:43 AM, Laurie Solomon wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE cite=mid:COL119-DS45661361AA820D27BDFA1BD320@phx.gbl type="cite">
<DIV dir=ltr>
<DIV style="FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); FONT-SIZE: 12pt">
<DIV>I think we already know the answer to that one; but a better and more
accurate way of stating the question might be “Who isn’t he working
for?” The answer to the newly restated question is “not us”. I am
afraid that Obama is working for Obama first and foremost – opportunistically
supporting whatever at the moment looks like it will be best for Obama and his
future interests – political and economical.</DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: none">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt tahoma">
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV style="BACKGROUND: rgb(245,245,245)">
<DIV><B>From:</B> <A title=galliher@illinois.edu
href="mailto:galliher@illinois.edu" moz-do-not-send="true">C. G. Estabrook</A>
</DIV>
<DIV><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, November 11, 2010 8:43 AM</DIV>
<DIV><B>To:</B> <A title=peace-discuss@anti-war.net
href="mailto:peace-discuss@anti-war.net"
moz-do-not-send="true">Peace-discuss</A> </DIV>
<DIV><B>Subject:</B> [Peace-discuss] Who's he working for?</DIV></DIV></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV></DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT-STYLE: normal; DISPLAY: inline; FONT-FAMILY: 'Calibri'; COLOR: rgb(0,0,0); FONT-SIZE: small; FONT-WEIGHT: normal; TEXT-DECORATION: none">
<B>Obama to Renege on Afghan Drawdown</B><BR>"The Obama administration has
decided to begin publicly walking away from what it once touted as key
deadlines in the war in Afghanistan in an effort to de-emphasize President
Barack Obama's pledge that he'd begin withdrawing U.S. forces in July 2011,
administration and military officials have told McClatchy." This report
indicates not only that the "surge" failed militarily, but that the political
policy in which it was embedded - that troops would be withdrawn whether the
surge succeeded or not - has also failed...<BR><<A
class=moz-txt-link-freetext
href="http://www.truth-out.org/mcclatchy-obama-renege-afghan-drawdown64998"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://www.truth-out.org/mcclatchy-obama-renege-afghan-drawdown64998</A>
<A class=moz-txt-link-rfc2396E
href="http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=57iiPxQLT9k6fMEvHvQpN9eiq389iYMq"
moz-do-not-send="true"><http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=57iiPxQLT9k6fMEvHvQpN9eiq389iYMq></A><BR><BR>
<B>Obama reportedly agrees to allow rich bigger tax cut than middle
class</B><BR> By John Byrne<BR> Thursday,
November 11th, 2010<BR>David Axelrod, the senior adviser to President Barack
Obama, says that the White House has conceded to Republicans in giving into
tax cuts for the wealthy, a legacy of a Bush-era policy to reduce federal
taxes for various income classes. He doesn't, however, say that the rich
should enjoy the tax cuts forever, but the decision to agree to a temporary
extension of the cuts may be a moot point, because it likely will simply push
the issue to a future presidential term...<BR><BR><A
class=moz-txt-link-rfc2396E
href="http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/white-house-agree-bush-tax-cuts-rich/?utm_source=Raw+Story+Daily+Update&utm_campaign=aee3380bbb-Nov11Newsletter11_11_2010&utm_medium=email"
moz-do-not-send="true"><http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/white-house-agree-bush-tax-cuts-rich/?utm_source=Raw+Story+Daily+Update&utm_campaign=aee3380bbb-Nov11Newsletter11_11_2010&utm_medium=email></A><BR><BR>
<HR>
_______________________________________________<BR>Peace-discuss mailing
list<BR><A class=moz-txt-link-abbreviated
href="mailto:Peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net">Peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net</A><BR><A
class=moz-txt-link-freetext
href="http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss">http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss</A><BR></DIV></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE>
<P>
<HR>
_______________________________________________<BR>Peace-discuss mailing
list<BR>Peace-discuss@lists.chambana.net<BR>http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss<BR></DIV></DIV></DIV></BODY></HTML>