[Peace-discuss] No enemies to the left

[C. G. Estabrook]

The difference is that Johnson had a vigorous anti-war movement exposing what he
did ("Hey, hey, LBJ / How many kids did you kill today?") -- Nixon (who
resembles Obama more that Johnson does) even more so.  Even Bill Clinton had
serious critics of his war-making.  But the contemporary analogues of those
people are supporting "their president" Obama.  His politics reduce to
successful chicanery.  The responsibility rests with those activists who,
instead of exposing it, have supported it.  --CGE


Neil Parthun wrote:
> This is what I feared -- the Democrats, by and large, slinking to the defense
> of Obama, saying he has to engage in these destructive, imperial policies to
> avoid criticism from the far-right fringes of the American political
> discourse.
> 
> In talks with some friends, one of them put it quite succinctly: "No matter
> what Obama does to prove his hawkish bones and that the Dems are not 'soft on
> terror', the Republicans are always going to call him and the Dems a bunch of
> pussies.  But for some reason, rank-n-file Democrats think that by going over
> the top to make their bones to be 'tough on terror', 'tough on crime', etc.,
> they will stop the allegations."
> 
> The far right is always going to call any non rightist a "pussy" -- as the
> right would have killed more people, killed them faster, done it more
> effectively, et al.  Yet, the rank-n-file Democrats seem to feel that they
> need to fall in line to defend an indefensible policy -- the imperial
> occupation of a country and to dictate to them how to run their lives.
> 
> I know that the Democratic leadership is bought and sold by US corporate and
> imperial interests.  I just don't see why rank-n-file Democrats don't seem to
> want to stop this insanity.  Albert Einstein said the essence of insanity is
> doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.
> The rank-n-file Democrats have fallen behind LBJ during his bloodbath in
> Vietnam thinking that this would exorcise the idea of the 'weak in war'
> Democrats, Bill Clinton's bombings and deathdealing throughout the world and
> now the Obama run warfare.  Yet, the right still says they are soft on their
> "enemy" and the Dems think that further acquiescence of more hawkish policies
> will curb such criticism from the right.
> 
> Solidarity, Neil
> 
> The truth won't defend itself, though, and bastard or not, it's got me. 
> [warren ellis, 1968-]
>