[Peace-discuss] Obama's threat

[C. G. Estabrook]

Well put.

I think Obama has a high enough opinion of his own rhetorical skills that he
often says more or less what he thinks -- confident that he can cover sin with
smooth names.  Witness his talk about Jerusalem at AIPAC.  He thought, perhaps
rightly, that he could take a position further to the right than the
administration and yet still retain liberal approval.  It wasn't the first time
(e.g, Afghanistan, Pakistan).

As his book shows, he thinks his real talent is selling elite policies to the
plebs (even though those policies are manifestly not in their interest).  He
calls this "bringing us together"...

I think we're all bozos on this bus. --CGE


E. Wayne Johnson wrote:
> It is not too easy to forget that GWBush was elected in 2000 because of his
> talk of a humble foreign policy no nation-building and not policing the
> world, a discontinuation of the foreign policy of Yugoslavia-bombing Bill
> Clinton --- and now here we are in 2008, pretty sure we are being lied to
> because the lips of the candidates are moving. Except for McCain.  Who seems
> unbelievably believable when he promises more wars and more foreign
> entanglements.
> 
> The famous Firesign Theatre politician George Leroy Tirebiter said "It's time
> to Wake up!  And look at Me!  Your only logical choice!", "And you can
> believe me -- because I'm always right, and I never lie."
> 
> C. G. Estabrook wrote:
>> John W. wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 10:29 AM, C. G. Estabrook <galliher at uiuc.edu> 
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> [Remember that in the 2000 campaign Bush attacked Clinton's invasion of
>>> Serbia and said that he would not indulge in such "nation-building."  We
>>> have to assume that some people voted for him because they were tired of
>>>  Clinton's foreign policy lies.  Now Obama attacks Bush's foreign policy
>>> lies...]
>> 
>> I mean that some people may vote for Obama because they're tired of Bush's 
>> foreign policy lies -- with no assurance that we'll get anything different
>> (We didn't last time.)  In fact, there's some evidence that we'll get a 
>> continuation of the usual US foreign policy, perhaps with cosmetic changes,
>> so to speak.
>> 
>> 
>>> And you're attacking what you've already decided are Obama's past lies,
>>> while holding up his present words as some sort of immutable truth. What
>>>  if Obama is lying NOW to get elected, and he really intends, once 
>>> elected, to do the opposite of what he's saying now?  You reckon that's
>>> possible?
>> 
>> I'm afraid that's what Obama's defenders are reduced to: "Vote for him --
>> he's lying!"
>> 
>>> Ralph Nader tells the truth all the time, and never changes his message.
>>> But he don't get elected.  What does that tell you?
>> 
>> It reminds me that the US spends a third of its world-largest GDP on 
>> propaganda. You can manufacture a lot of consent for that.
>> 
>>> Barack Obama calls Iran a 'threat' Fri, 27 Jun 2008 09:32:07
>>> 
>>> US Presidential hopeful Barack Obama calls the Islamic Republic of Iran a
>>> 'threat' during a word association game in a TV interview ...
>>