One way to gauge what Obama's policies might be is who he appoints to his staff. We have already one key appointment that does not bode well for a change in approach on a key issue. That appointment is of Rahm Emanuel as his chief of staff.
In the first major appointment of his administration, President-elect Barack Obama has named as his chief of staff Congressman Rahm Emanuel, an Israeli citizen and Israeli army veteran whose father, according to the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, was a member of Menachem Begin's Irgun forces during the Nakba and named his son after "a Lehi combatant who was killed" -- i.e., a member of Yitzhak Shamir's terrorist Stern Gang, responsible for, in addition to other atrocities against Palestinians, the more famous bombing of the King David Hotel and assassination of the UN peace envoy Count Folke Bernadotte.Not a good start. And here.
In rapid response to this news, the editorial in the next day's Arab News (Jeddah) was entitled "Don't pin much hope on Obama -- Emanuel is his chief of staff and that sends a message". This editorial referred to the Irgun as a "terror organization" (a judgment call) and concluded: "Far from challenging Israel, the new team may turn out to be as pro-Israel as the one it is replacing."
That was always likely. Obama repeatedly pledged unconditional allegiance to Israel during his campaign, most memorably in an address to the AIPAC national convention which Israeli peace activist Uri Avnery characterized as "a speech that broke all records for obsequiousness and fawning", and America's electing a black president has always been more easily imagined than any American president's declaring his country's independence from Israeli domination.
Others will try to coopt the new president.I had really wanted to celebrate Barack Obama's remarkable victory for a day or so before becoming cynical again. I really did.
And yet, less than 24 hours after the first polls closed, the president-elect chose as his chief of staff -- perhaps the most powerful single position in any administration -- Rahm Emanuel, one of the most conservative Democratic members of Congress.
The chief of staff essentially acts as the president's gatekeeper, determining with whom he has access for advice and analysis. Obama is known as a good listener who has been open to hearing from and considering the perspectives of those on the Left as well as those with a more centrist to conservative perspective. How much access he will actually have as president to more progressive voices, however, is now seriously in question.
Illinois Congressman Rahm Emanuel is a member of the so-called New Democrat Coalition (NDC), of group of center-right pro-business Congressional Democrats affiliated with the Democratic Leadership Conference, which is dedicated to moving the Democratic Party away from its more liberal and progressive base. Numbering only 58 members out of 236 Democrats in the current House of Representatives, the NDC has worked closely with its Republican colleagues in pushing through and passing such legislation as those providing President Bush with "fast-track" trade authority in order to bypass efforts by labor, environmentalists and other public interest groups to promote fairer trade policy.
To avoid falling for the same old, Ray McGovern suggests that President Obama ask questions at Presidential Daily Briefings ... and some personnel changes might help, as well.
Suggestions for changes.
In one area, foreign policy, there are warning signs examined in the above material. Other areas will be examined as appointments and other indicatorts become available. Not, perhaps a good start, but much will depend on whether President Obama respionds to the desires of the electorate or to other influences ... and his own attitudes and strength.
4 comments:
G'day Phil, on preparing the way ...
Things to do ... and some to undo.
From the first article:
Obama has made clear that addressing the economy is his top priority. In his first press conference since the election, he urged Congress to pass an economic stimulus package, and if it failed (or if President Bush failed to sign it), he would push for that as soon as he took office.
An obvious priority ... for the short term, but unless something else is addressed ...
From Tomdispatch - Michael T. Klare and the matter of energy.
Of all the challenges facing President Barack Obama next January, none is likely to prove as daunting, or important to the future of this nation, as that of energy. After all, energy policy -- so totally mishandled by the outgoing Bush-Cheney administration -- figures in each of the other major challenges facing the new president, including the economy, the environment, foreign policy, and our Middle Eastern wars. Most of all, it will prove a monumental challenge because the United States faces an energy crisis of unprecedented magnitude that is getting worse by the day.
The U.S. needs energy -- lots of it. Day in and day out, this country, with only 5% of the world's population, consumes one quarter of the world's total energy supply. About 40% of our energy comes from oil: some 20 million barrels, or 840 million gallons a day. Another 23% comes from coal, and a like percentage from natural gas. Providing all this energy to American consumers and businesses, even in an economic downturn, remains a Herculean task, and will only grow more so in the years ahead. Addressing the environmental consequences of consuming fossil fuels at such levels, all emitting climate-altering greenhouse gases, only makes this equation more intimidating.
As President Obama faces our energy problem, he will have to address three overarching challenges:
1. The United States relies excessively on oil to supply its energy needs at a time when the future availability of petroleum is increasingly in question.
2. Our most abundant domestic source of fuel, coal, is the greatest emitter of greenhouse gases when consumed in the current manner.
3. No other source of energy, including natural gas, nuclear power, biofuels, wind power, and solar power is currently capable of supplanting our oil and coal consumption, even if a decision is made to reduce their importance in our energy mix.
This, then, is the essence of Obama's energy dilemma. Let's take a closer look at each of its key components.
These next eight years are vital.
about this 'hope' business ...
.. not the best way-to-go, apparently
-=*=-
G'day Bob,
I know you're pretty sharp, and see things others might miss, but did you see this one? It starts with this:
«A well-educated, highly intelligent and articulate young progressive candidate promising hope and change -- and a withdrawal of troops from Iraq -- ousts a long-entrenched, hidebound, deeply corrupt rightwing faction from power.»
[chris-floyd/...hope-and-change...]
Well, of course, the URL is a bit of a give-away, and as usual, anyone interested should read the whole lot - also including the comments, which is what 'made the connection' with me, after reading the 'hope' mentions in the above Janders article, and in the previous one.
The comment of special interest is the one by michael coyote, quoting a bit of Greek mythology and then Nietzsche.
Note (sadly), that some Aussie troll has the current (05Nov'08) last comment. Big problem that; utterly irresponsible, often filthily lying trolls.
Each of B, B & H is going/has gone from power, but their stench remains. The only effective way forward is to *push* their successors to clean up the horrific mess - 'hope' won't even butter pumpkins. Perhaps the current financial crisis is a blessing in disguise; perhaps a few adults will now exert effective control. If the Anglos can't/won't do it, perhaps the Frogs, Krauts, Russkies and/or Chinks can/will; whoever does will be a big winner. But don't hold your breath hoping, agitate! Democratic representatives must now start properly representing us, we the sheople®, that'd only be fair. I call on Rudd to start doing the *right & proper* thing: ditch any and all special interests (like 'the deserving rich' - haw!!?), save our - the people's - economy, save our once jewel-like planet!
G'day Phil, I liked the Cree prophecy as well. Meanwhile, one change is being planned ... the closing of Gitmo ...
Depending on the nature of the new system, it is a step in the right direction.
G'day Phil, it seems the IAEA looks to the Obama administration for a more cooperative approach to the iran ussue ... Juan Cole on the matter - with a couple of links to flesh out the story ... the first is a case of "Has forgeriesRus struck again?"
I'm shocked, shocked that allegations are emerging at the International Atomic Energy Agency that US-supplied "documents" from a laptop acquired in 2004 indicating a secret Iranian weapons program were probably forgeries.
The IAEA clearly hopes that the Obama administration will stop trying to undermine it and will stop the Washington habit of using forged documents as a basis for aggressive military responses to nuclear programs and instead will opt for diplomacy.
Post a Comment