I hope Barack Obama sends a nice Christmas or Kwanzaa present to George W. Bush. Without the debacle of the Bush Administration Barack would not have had a shot at winning the White House. Widespread disgust over the war in Iraq, the collapse of the financial industry in September and October, and Barack’s massive campaign war chest created a perfect storm that helped Obama secure the win.

Riffing off of the Newsweek editors’ quesiness over the cult of personality surrounding Barack, let me just add that I too think the worshipful descriptions of Barack as a new kind of Messiah is creepy. Guys feeling a tingle up their leg when he talks, swooning women, and fawning reporters is not a healthy situation in a democracy. I was watching the BBC earlier today with the sound off. They played a clip of the former Korean dictator, Kim Il Sung, walking among his people, who cheered and wept at his very appearance. Now, I’m not saying Barack is a Korean dictator, but the mindless praise is eerily similar.

I am amused by the innocent, naive belief by many “Progressives” that their messiah has come and the new era of progressive politics is upon us. One of my Progressive friends sent me the following analysis from Think Progress claiming it is a myth that America is Center-Right:

My friend, who lives in California, was earnest and sincere in sending this along. I sent back a respons–“You have got to be shitting me?” Why? The first piece of evidence is Proposition 8. California, the so-called land of moderate progressives, passed Proposition 8 last Tuesday banning homosexual marriage. Now if that happens in California, what do you think would happen in Kentucky, Kansas or Iowa? At least on the matter of personal sexual conduct when it comes to homosexuality America is very, very conservative.

Personally, I don’t understand why conservatives want to have government regulating conduct between consenting adults. I guess I am a libertarian conservative. I believe that sexual relations between consenting adults is not the business of any government. Worrying about erecting barriers to prevent homosexual men and women from getting married is a silly distraction in a world where we have real problems before us. I am betting that Barack Obama and his team are not going to get out in front of this issue. They will follow the popular will. Rather than try to use the bully pulpit of the White House to make the case that homosexual adults are entitled to the same rights as heterosexual adults, I am betting team Obama will be silent. I think there is some more disillusion coming for the Gay/Lesbian community on this issue.

Looking for a quick withdrawal from Iraq? I don’t think that is going to happen either. In fact, look for team Obama to start making the case that the situation has changed on the ground and that the Iraqi government wants us as a partner to help rebuild their society and infrastructure. Truth is the actual substance of U.S. policy in Iraq is not likely to change. At the same time look for the boost in U.S. combat forces going to Afghanistan and continued covert cross-border raids into Pakistan.

As I noted in an earlier piece, Rahm Emanuel is no pacifist. To the contrary. He was an uber-hawk on Iraq. We are witnesses to a fascinating split in the American Jewish community. The Jewish community is no different than the Christian community. It really is not a community and represents diametrically opposed points of view. Barack Obama and Emanuel have both been backed financially by very wealthy Chicago jewish families–the Crowns and the Pritzkers. They are not in sync with the more conservative neo-cons embodied by the likes of William Kristol. They are pro-Israel but anti-likud. Prospects of war with Iran are probably reduced with this crowd.

Last year I participated in a war game looking at the future of the Middle East. The assembled experts agreed at the end of the game that the one policy move that could put Iran on the defensive would be an agreement between Syria and Israel over the Golan Heights. Up to now the Bush Administration has opposed such a move. If the Obama team goes in that direction they might get a breakthrough in the Middle East that has seemed so elusive. That would be good news and might help Obama calm the fears of his Palestinian supporters who see him stacking his Administration with prominent Jewish Americans who carry pro-Israel credentials.

What about ignoring FISA (i.e., the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act)? Now that this power is in the hands of Democrats will they relinquish it? I don’t think so. I would like to see a full restoration of FISA and a requirement that no serveillance is undertaken without having judicial review. Someone other than the Executive Branch needs to have a say in this matter.

Finally, there will be the economic policy front. Will Barack and company embark on a massive public employment program or seek to invest in the private sector and promote jobs thru some form of capitalism? If it is the former the Progressive will rejoice. But, if it is the later, Progressives will chalk up another example of a politician promising them one thing but delivering the opposite. It does look that Barack and his team recognize America is Center Right and are going to play to the element. For a guy who hung with Tony Rezko and dissed Hillary (bonehead moves in my book) Barack could establish himself as a very smart pol. We’ll see.

SHARE
Previous article“He had me until he picked the dummy”
Next articleMessage To The GOP – You Need To Start Over.
Larry C. Johnson is a former analyst at the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, who moved subsequently in 1989 to the U.S. Department of State, where he served four years as the deputy director for transportation security, antiterrorism assistance training, and special operations in the State Department's Office of Counterterrorism. He left government service in October 1993 and set up a consulting business. He currently is the co-owner and CEO of BERG Associates, LLC (Business Exposure Reduction Group) and is an expert in the fields of terrorism, aviation security, and crisis and risk management, and money laundering investigations. Johnson is the founder and main author of No Quarter, a weblog that addresses issues of terrorism and intelligence and politics. NoQuarterUSA was nominated as Best Political Blog of 2008.
  • Obama will leave Iraq for a simple reason Larry; Maliki whats us gone. Maliki can not survive with a foreign power occupying his country. His legitimacy depends on having the U.S. troop leave Iraq and leave soon. He can not have U.S. permanent bases, he can not have Blackwater tear-assing around Baghdad, he can not have U.S. troopers kicking in doors and killing his citizens willy-nilly. If he allows that he is literally a dead man sooner or later. To survive he needs the U.S. foot-print to be small to non-existent. His needs dove-tails nicely with Obama who also wants the US to get out of Iraq. It won’t be a rapid disengagement but look for our forces to be mostly gone by the 2010 election. There are good political and military reasons for that time line.

    Look also for Obama to also unload as much of the economic and administrative responsibilities for Iraq as possible. He can wave a huge carrot by ending the no-bid contracts and offering them up to the international community. Obama understands that a 12 billion a month commitment to Iraq is unsustainable especially in the present economic situation.

    And even if the occupation of Iraq were economically sustainable it is not militarily sustainable. The military is fraying from the Operational Tempo required by the Iraq and Afghanistan commitments. The military needs to get out of Iraq before we have a repeat of the collapse of good order and discipline that happened in Vietnam.

    Thus there are at least three separate reasons for the U.S. to end the Iraq occupation, the Iraqis want us gone, the U.S. military wants us gone, and we can’t afford to stay there much longer.

    With the U.S. out of Iraq Obama can then turn to our NATO allies to re-target Afghanistan. The only real question here is if he can get the troops needed into that area before the mission collapses from Bushite incompetence. Karzi is barely the mayor of Kabul and his government is inept, incompetent and grossly corrupt. The Taliban is back bigger than life and twice as ugly. Central control, something of an oxymoron in the history of Afghanistan, is a non-existent. Oddly enough though all is not lost; we are not totally without allies. No we are not talking about NATO or the U.K. we are talking about Iran. Iran hates Al Qaeda even more than we do. Look for Obama to make a play for Iran and for Iran to do an “enemy of my enemy” deal.

    As for the myth of America being center-right; yup it is a myth. America right now is center-center with only a tiny lean left. Look at the policies, Universal Health care, Pro-Union, etc, etc. Even Prop 8 is a whole lot less than it seems. Prop 8 won with a ton of money from the Mormon church. Even then it cleared with only five percentage points after a media blitz that raise fear-mongering to a new level. Larry you were not subjected to those pro 8 ads; vile does not begin to describe them. They were sleazy and they lied without shame. More to the point the last time California voted on the issue, the results were a blow out the win being more than 60%. So even after scaring the voters senseless and flooding the airways with hate the right still lost ground in California.

    And something else happened with prop 8. It is only in its formative stages right now but it will grow. There is going to be a huge blow-back from the LBGTQ community. The Mormon church is already feeling it. Any complacency in the LBGTQ community is now a thing of the past. They are pissed and they are going to organize and push-back like no ones business. They are going to engage both the A-A and Latino/a community in a way never seen before. They are also going to engage the larger body politic in a way never seen before either. Prop 8 is not the end of the matter. It may become a Pyrrhic victory for the right.

    I can understand why you may not have cried when Obama won the election, or maybe you cried for other reasons. Is the breathless praise a tad over done? Perhaps but then again one can not escape the symbolism. We elected a mix race man with a oddball name for president. This matters Larry; symbols matter. The face of the president-elect says something to the world and to our nation. Beside as a person who has been both passionately Pro-Hillary and then passionately Anti-Obama you ,Larry, have little room to complain about other peoples over-the-top emotions. Glass houses and stones Larry; glass houses and stones.

    It is a little too early to really know whether Obama will be center-right or center-left or just center. Obama will most likely govern as a compromiser and a pragmatist. The silliness about Obama being a secret black nationalist or a secret Marxist or secret Socialist or whatever was never believable. Same goes for Obama being a machine politician from Chicago. Obama is very deliberate, very celebrial man. He will listen to Republicans, he will listen to DLC Democrats and he will listen to the left / progressives; then he will make up his own mind. The man has offered up an olive branch to Joe Lieberman for heavens sake. He might be a lot more serious about being post-partisan, non-partisan, and non-ideological than any of us realize. Again think Center-Center and pragmatic.

    What will disappoint most of the people at N.Q. is finding out where the center of the nation is. Eight years of Bush / Cheney misrule has soured the nation on Conservative notions. The Center of the nation is a lot further to the “left” than most of the Beltway pundits realize. When the right screamed “Socialist” about Obama, most people either ignored the claim or worse thought ” well if that is Socialism then I want me some of that.” Some years back Limbaugh declared “Roosevelt is dead!” Well thanks to George W. Bush Regan and his revolution are now also dead. A slim majority of Americans want government in their lives- 51%. As this recession plays out that number will only go up. It’s hard to be a rugged individualist when your job is gone and your house is in foreclosure. As private and local resources fail to respond to the present economic downturn all eyes will look to Washington. There will be little patience or support for politicians claiming that the market alone will solve the present situation.

    If this really was a Center-Right nation Larry McCain would have won. Instead Democrats won the presidency, won at least seven Senate seats, won twenty house seats and cleaned house in New England. The Republican party has now has had two elections where they had their clock cleaned. That has only happened once before- in the days of Herbert Hoover. The Republican brand and Conservatism itself are in deep kimchi Larry, homophobia only goes so far, you have to have something more to hang your hat on. The old social issues just do not have the same punch as they used to. Just ask former senator Dole. Just ask John McCain, every time he went negative he lost votes while Obama stayed rock steady. But hey if you want to make the Republican loosing streak become three in a row in 2010, just stick with that center-right nonsense. Go ahead and step on that rake one more time.

  • SpaceCat

    You Hillary dead-enders are always good for a laugh. I can’t believe – actually, I can – that you’re still talking about REZKO!!!! REZKO!!!!REZKO!!!! REZKO!!!!REZKO!!!! REZKO!!!!REZKO!!!! REZKO!!!!REZKO!!!! REZKO!!!!REZKO!!!! REZKO!!!!REZKO!!!! REZKO!!!!REZKO!!!! REZKO!!!!REZKO!!!! REZKO!!!!REZKO!!!! REZKO!!!!REZKO!!!! REZKO!!!!REZKO!!!! REZKO!!!!REZKO!!!! REZKO!!!!REZKO!!!! REZKO!!!!REZKO!!!! REZKO!!!!REZKO!!!! REZKO!!!!REZKO!!!! REZKO!!!!REZKO!!!! REZKO!!!!

  • scorbs

    Ever heard of dog packs? They need their top dogs to feel secure and warm and fuzzy.

    No thanks. Some of us aren’t so atavistic or driven by the lowest part of our brains.

  • chris

    Without the debacle of the Bush Administration Barack would not have had a shot at winning the White House.

    This is absolutely right. In fact, without the debacle of the Bush Administration, Barack wouldn’t have run this year. Probably would’ve set his sights on 2016.

  • lark

    Larry, that was a funny article. You seem to think that winning has an effect on personality. You seem to think that winning is a catalyst that will transform BO from a pursuer a seeker into a doer. The hope syndrome. Fat chance.

    Obama = Pathological liar w/ anarchist tendencies and radical objectives. That means the following.

    Take each of your subjects/situations as a whole. Divide each by half, one side liberal the other conservative. BO will do both. Take each half and divided in half. Obama will do one half of each leaving the other half wanting and unaccomplished.

    Now provide the answer to this question, who won or what was accomplished?

    • Ferd Berfle

      The answer: Nobody wins except that one and nothing will be accomplished except that the winner is that one. It was all about him the entire time. The obamalobotobots and the media will learn that one soon enough.

      • gil mann

        obamalobotobots

        Okay, that’s pretty hilarious.

        I just come here to troll but credit where it’s due.

        • Betty Lou

          I was thinking part of trolling is learning to recognize a tactic.

          ROTFLAMO.

          You guys ARE funny, too bad you’re not in on the joke.

          Is it real 4u, 4sure.

    • Docelder

      BO will do both.

      “The third way” because Obama deep down has insecurities and is a “pleaser”. He will try to placate everybody to be loved by everybody… which can’t be done. It also makes him malleable like “playdoh” by his closest advisers, by his wife, by the the last book he has read… and so on.

      • Betty Lou

        Rezko, and Chicago.

        Look for increased patronage, and watch social security, very very carefully.

        They’ll slip it through the back door, sell it, over a period of time, cause they’re just SO fucking clever.

        ROTFLMAO.

        “Yeah, no one see what you’re doing, no one.”

        As someone once said to someone or another “Don’t they have a West Point where you live?”

        (West Point teaches military strategy.)

  • Ferd Berfle

    Sigh, bots on the left flank; bots on the right flank. What is a centrist to do?

    I say send all those brats back to their basements at Mommy’s house and let the adults take charge.

  • stodgie

    the left like the far right thinks in terms of idealogy but the center and business thinks in terms of money. the dims will go for the money everytime.

  • stodgie

    obama will stay in the center. he’ll do what the corporations tell him. the lefties will try and explain all this but after awhile it won’t work. the aa’s and lefties are lining up at the bus station as we speak. the buses are leaving their home stations and coming to do their jobs. hehehe

  • Everyone should back off Bush. He kept us safe after 9/11, which is way more than we can say about what Obama will do to this country. This is from the Department of Defense. Frankly, I am glad that Bush got rid of Saddam’s nuclear toys.

    Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria, Official Says
    By Samantha L. Quigley
    American Forces Press Service

    WASHINGTON, June 29, 2006 – The 500 munitions discovered throughout Iraq since 2003 and discussed in a National Ground Intelligence Center report meet the criteria of weapons of mass destruction, the center’s commander said here today.

    DELETED BY LARRY JOHNSON

    Lying about Joe and Valerie Wilson is not tolerated here. The facts are the facts. There was no purchase or attempt to buy uranium yellow cake in Niger because Iraq already had sufficient stores and could not process what they had. Those are the facts.
    LJ

    • Galt’s Pizza Parlor

      People should not engage in revisionist history over their love of Bush or the GOP.

      • Betty Lou

        Before the NYT’s editorial, before the Niger trip was even a thought, was there any adverse history between Joe Wilson, and the Bush administration?

        I would imagine he was a threat, in that he told the truth, but was anything larger looming?

        Was Colin Powell involved, too?

      • mimi

        Isn’t it pathetic?

        One of the reasons I didn’t vote for 0bama is because I know the rabid Bush lovers are going to use this inexperienced guy to rewrite the Bush administration’s history.

        Sometimes I think it was a conspiracy masterminded by Rove so that 0bama will be so bad as to make Bush look good.

        Ain’t gonna happen with me.

        I knew 0bama wasn’t up to the job. I knew that about Bush, also.

        What baffles me is how so many Americans could make the same mistake again.

  • FenelonSpoke

    ^^Oh dear, the Obambot is PO’ed Soemone dared diss his faux messiah. Therefore, that person’s analysis not worth anything. Typical Obot behavior.

    Heil, Obama. Heil, Obama.

    .

    • Ferd Berfle

      LMAO. I would have thought that the obamalobotobots would take a few months off courtesy of that one. Nope, they’re still forced to work at $0.05 per post. Someone should call the Labor Department concerning slave wages. Oops-the boss will soon be running things. Guess they’ll be chattel until the next election cycle.

  • Dawnelle

    so are you working for the ROMNEY group since you slipped and said MORMON???

    or did I miss something while you were acting like a smug ass with your nose stuck up barrys ass?

    oops my bad
    I’m trying not to cuss

    damn larry you have some real DILLY’s haten on you these daze!!

  • cathnealon

    Obama lies
    Obama lies
    Obama lies
    Doesn’t anyone get that–after this primary and general election season
    Public financing
    Fisa
    Iraq
    Nafta
    Wright
    Birth certificate
    And on and on

    • Ferd Berfle

      cath: The truth will out over the course of the next four years. Those of us who supported McCain will be vindicated. That one is going to be as bad a choice as the one who preceded him–and for the same reasons.

  • cathnealon

    Public schools? His kids when to Chcago Lab school or some nonsense like that at 20,000 a year. You know why? Because Ayers and his other buddies wasted 50 million lining their own pockets and puffing up their own egos instead of improving Chicago’s schools which are among the worst in the nation.
    BO and that horrible wife of his are out for themselves only and all of the economic and international crises in the world don’t mean crap to them–they and their henchman Emmanuel are going to do exactly what’s best for them. Face it–they’re Chicago thugs, nothing more and that’s how they’ll govern.

  • Tristan

    There’s always something dumb to argue about, isn’t there? America is a center-right country depending upon how you define center-right, which of course is absolutely impossible for anyone from the left and right to agree on.

    Most Americans would be happy with competent leadership. If the Democrats don’t deliver within a few years, they’ll kick them out and put in more Republicans.

    • sowsear

      If you’re serious about competent, then why “select” BO instead of Hillary. He doesn’t even know how many states there are in the US.

    • Dawnelle

      true it is relative to where each of us thinks the CENTER is

      yup

  • athy

    Larry,
    Excellent post. Thanks.

    The articles are coming out to prevent Progressives from feeling disappointment about certain actions
    being taken/decisions being made by the President Elect.

    Basically, in this article the author (Randy Shaw) asks the readers to not judge too quickly what we are witnessing. That Barack Obama is really a progressive on the side of the voters- all of us- but he has to do some things that may upset Progressives and others who BELIEVED in him but they should not worry.

    Have faith, believe, Barack Obama knows exactly what he is doing.

    So…dont question Barack Obama, support him, as he continues to accumulate power and then if things dont go exactly as planned-its not his fault.

    He needs to have more power & authority (cause you know how strong the opposition is) so we will have to give him even more power-and we will have to give him more time so we will have to re-elect him in 2012 so he can finish what he is trying to accomplish.

    Yeah Mr Shaw..sure…okay…NOT

    http://www.beyondchron.org/news/index.php?itemid=6277

    A Progressive’s Guide to Obama’s Appointment Process
    by Randy Shaw‚ Nov. 10‚ 2008

  • hadenough

    Some had ‘hope’ that obama would send his kids to public school in DC. Ya know prove his commitment to public education. The battleaxe was checking out DC schools today and several were mentioned. Two of those grade schools, Sidwell Friends School and Georgetown Day, are not public. In fact they are very private schools. Tuition at each school is about $30,000 a year per student.

    If obama, who gave up a chance at a high paying lawyer gig so he could make millions in politics, can afford to send his kids to a $30,000 a year grade school more power to him. Obama never promised he would send his kids to DC public school. obama always seemed like ‘let them eat cake’ guy to me. The real question is what in the world made some think he would send his kids to public schools?

    • anotherone

      It’s not so easy. Not every school in the country is equipped to deal with the kids of politicians, rock stars and other high profile parents, kids who have very serious and severe security concerns. For this reason alone, such kids tend to cluster at schools where security needs, as well as privacy, can be addressed.

      • Strawberrybitch

        Oh for crying out loud! It’s Washington DC. Where do you think Chelsea Clinton went…do you ever stop making excuses for Barky the dirtbag?

    • Tristan

      School choice is the issue the Republicans need to run on in urban areas and a good way to start is by calling Obama a hypocrite.

    • mimi

      It’s pure idealism for people who think that politicians who reject vouchers will send their kids to public school.

      Just witness the comment above excusing it because it’s not easy, and the security concerns.

      BTW, most AAs believe in vouchers. I know I do.

      I hate the public school system and the teacher’s union. Public Schools need massive reform and overhauling. They are still operating in a system established during the Industrial Revolution.

      Excuse me but, this is the 21st Century. Kids, especially inner city kids from single parent homes need a different system. There are too many distractions for children nowadays. TV, the Internet, video games and other electronics, digital photography and cell phones. These distractions must be taken into consideration and somehow utilized in education.

      And teachers need more money, period!

      It doesn’t bother me that his kids will go to private school. I’m sure they could care less what some may think. And I’m sure he’ll get a pass, but I hope not.

  • evgenia

    Why are some media outlets just now examining the cult of personality aspect of Obama and his followers? Nowhere is this kind of behavior more true than younger voters. These voters, mainly teens and twentysomthings, buy whole-heartedly into the concept that one almighty, powerful person can accomplish transformative change.

    Thank God that I was in my 20s when the first Harry Potter book came out, but I think for a generation raised on such a cultural phenomenon, it’s apropos for them to be comfortable with the idea of a omnipotent, singular leader. Furthermore, the marketing of Obama to young voters was a genius strategy. The campaign correctly theorized the lack of critical-thinking skills and intellectual curiousity on the part these younger voters, and capitalized on marketing Obama based solely upon emotional appeal. No one wants to be viewed as uncool as much as Gen Y-ers, and they bought it hook, line and sinker.

    Similar to the way that many people of my age group, the thirtysomethings, embrace environmentalism as religion, these younger voters devoted themselves to Obama just as religiously. This is what scares me so much, environmentalism is one thing, but the warped mentality which predisposes one to accept or follow a singular, God-like leader is another.

    • Pennsylvania Red

      If you know any of the Old Testament books, many of the False Gods did not fare too well after they enjoyed their fifteen minutes of fame.

    • The Obama campaign was pure propaganda, plain and simple.

      What this shows me is that most supposedly “smart” liberals are extremely gullible and susceptible to the right type of propaganda.

    • mimi

      “Why are some media outlets just now examining the cult of personality aspect of Obama and his followers?”

      Because he’s elected now.

      Perhaps you meant that to be a trick question.

  • EightBelles

    A couple of days ago I read an article about the lifting of dual citizenship restrictions in the hiring of US intelliegence agents. The article went on to explain that bi-lingual attributes of dual citizenship are an asset in dealing with America’s enemies. I couldn’t help but wonder if such leniency in citizenship requirements might not also prove to be an asset in the event that our President elect turns out not to be a bonifide citizen of the United States.

    I agree with Larry. Mr. Obama owes George W. Bush, Jr. bigtime. He should send a nice Yuletide offering to Pres Bush. He should include a personal note thanking Pres Bush for lowering the bar to the extent that many remain unconvinced Mr. Obama is eligible to assume the highest office in the land, yet no original birth certificate has been wrested from the hands of the man who would be President.

    For those interested in becoming part of a group that aspires to expose election 2008 for the debacle it is, go to FreedomMarch.org.

    • EightBelles

      typo: intelligence

  • Does anyone know what the vegas odds are for an Obama impeachment?

    As for the Mark Twain quote: He certainly nails Obama. I guess nothing has really changed besides the names.

    Obama=Bush III

  • Doc99

    Is Jamie Gorelick really under consideration for Attorney General? Jamie Gorelick is the great conjunction of Duke Lacrosse, Fannie Mae, and 9-11 (“The Wall.”)

    • Doc99

      Sorry … I left out Gorelick’s links to “Friends of Angelo” and the whole Clipper Chip fiasco.

  • Bob Smith

    Larry:

    Dude, where’s the “Whitey Tape”? Can’t believe you would lead us on this way. Give it up! We need the tape man. Hillary can still win this thing.

    • Strawberrybitch

      OMG YOU ARE SO CLEVER, LIKE WE’VE NEVER HAD ANYONE, EVER, COME HERE AND ASK LARRY FOR THE WHITEY TAPE! Please O’ King of comedy, grace us with your humour more often. We, proles, worship at your feet.

  • johninca

    For a guy who hung with Tony Rezko and dissed Hillary (bonehead moves in my book) Barack could establish himself as a very smart pol. We’ll see.

    He could. Scripture says pray for rulers, so I’m praying that Obama will totally change his depraved policies.

  • George Smathers

    What two personal qualities does Obama have that explains his rapid political rise?

    To succeed in life, you need two things: ignorance and confidence. – Mark Twain

    • Dawnelle

      good one

    • Ferd Berfle

      Well that one is ignorant as they comes and he is experienced with confidence, as in confidence schemes. Yep, it fits that one well.

  • Mandelay

    Breaking:
    Dean not to seek 2nd term as Dem chairman
    1 hour ago
    WASHINGTON (AP) — Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean plans to step down from his post when his term expires in January, aides said Monday.
    Dean, a physician and former Vermont governor who was briefly his party’s presidential front-runner in 2004, was elected DNC chairman in 2005 and has long vowed to serve only one, four-year term. At a postelection news conference in Washington last week, Dean indicated again that he didn’t plan to stay on.
    President-elect Obama, a Democrat, was expected to choose Dean’s successor. Traditionally, the president selects the national chairman of his own party.
    Dean was the architect of a “50-State Strategy,” investing money and staff in every state — including those where Democrats had long fared poorly — to build party infrastructure and lay the groundwork for electoral gains. The Obama campaign, working with DNC organizers in all 50 states, won several states that had not elected a Democratic president in decades, including Virginia, North Carolina and Indiana.
    State party chairs were generally thrilled with Dean’s approach, while some Democratic leaders in Washington complained early on that the party’s money would be better spent helping candidates who had a real chance of winning.

  • Right on the Left Coast

    Great article, Larry. I agree that the ballot initiatives around the country are the true way to judge the feeling of America, not the presidential election.

    A lot of social change and tax/spend legislation went down this election. I don’t think most American’s give much thought about what they are, philosophically. I think they look at each issue without much regard to whether it is a right or left stance. When they do this, however, they mostly come out on the philosophical side of limiting taxes and responsibly spending our money, restricting government intervention in our lives, reducing systems and incentives of corruption and a strong national defense. The differences between people being how to address these issues across a fairly narrow band of center left/center right.

    I think Hillary had most of the legs of this stool in her favor, but she was successfully painted as too hawkish on defense (crazy as that sounds) and was marginalized by the Obama team.

    On the Republican side, I just don’t think John McCain is a strong philosophical guy. I think he looks at each issue and isn’t good at articulating the overarching principles that guide his policies.

    The bottom line…this was a change election. People voted to interrupt the Bush, Clinton, Bush, Clinton cycle. America certainly didn’t change it’s philosophy, it just wanted a different face in the White House.

    Let’s just hope that what we got is someone who recognizes this.

  • Betty Lou

    Have you once, just once, given President Bush credit for doing the one thing he has done; keep your ass from being blown out of a building by a terrorist who has no interest in your political machinations?
    ———-

    I give credit to the agency, or the military myself.

    They were at odds with Bush/Cheney, remember?

  • retire05

    Perhaps you should have thought about the possibility of having someone like Obama elected during the last 8 years.

    Have you once, just once, given President Bush credit for doing the one thing he has done; keep your ass from being blown out of a building by a terrorist who has no interest in your political machinations? Have you ever back him? Have you ever criticized the reasons that the 19 hijackers were able to work their evil plans all those years, going undetected?

    No, you contibuted to the BDS that became rampant in this nation.

    Then you looked up and saw Obama, Dean and Brazille had managed to wrest the nomination away from Hillary (who deserved it) and said “Oh, shit”. Did you not see it coming? Did you really think that after 8 years of no support for a man who only wanted to keep us safe would not give us what we now have?

    Did Bush make mistakes in Iraq? Yes, but you also seem to forget that FDR made horrible mistakes at the beginnning of WWII that cost us more men in one battle than all the soldiers we have lost in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

    Did you take on the New York Times as they were leaking national security information that placed us all in harm’s was (probably leaked by Jay Rockefeller)? Did you take on Harry Reid and John Murtha when they were smearing our soldiers? Did you stand by our President then?

    Now the entire nation will reap what you have sown. And God help us.

    • tek

      You people really need to open your eyes and SEE that George W. Bush is the reason Obama got in office. He has destroyed this country, he has thrived on a policy of destruction to Americans that gives him opportunity to grab power. Now we have an even more dangerous man who has gained that power.

      If Bush hadn’t taunted the Middle East to show favoritism to Israel in the first place, 9/11 would not have happened.

      If you can’t look at your party objectively and admit when mistakes are made, you’ll always have a deficient federal government.

      I don’t like what the Democrats are doing this year and I don’t like Obama and I’m not hesitant to call them out on their wrong-doing even though I’m a Democrat, but just reacting by insisting there’s nothing wrong with Bush is block-headed.

      • retire05

        If Bush hadn’t taunted the Middle East to show favoritism to Israel in the first place, 9-11 would not have happened.

        This is just this kind of moonbattery I am speaking of. Perhaps you should read the history of the 9-11 hijackers to see what they were doing prior to 9-11. Who was in office when they were taking lessons at flight schools? God, you are dense.

        Do I blame President Clinton for the terroists that killed 3,000 Americans. No, but I don’t place the blame on President Bush either, and if you want to do that, have at it, but realize that the 9-11 attack was not their first try. Their first try happened under Clinton.

        George Bush has not destroyed this nation. You are not going to prison, never to be heard from again, because of your hatred for him. No one is listening in on your conversations with your fishing buddies. So just how has he destroyed this nation? By trying to keep your sorry ass safe?

        It is people like you who bears the blame for a President Obama. Thanks for nothing. And when you really see your freedom slipping away because of socialist programs like forcing middle school kids to do “community service” whether they want to or not, don’t complain to me. When your taxes go up, don’t blame me. When gas is $5/gal, don’t blame me.

        Blame yourself.

        • sowsear

          The 1st Bush went to the Middle East and stirred up the hornet’s nest. Clinton inherited their anger.

          • retire05

            And Clinton had eight years to rid that anger. But he didn’t, did he? U.S. Cole ring a bell?

            I guess the terrorists were not impressed with bombing an aspirin factory.

            • Ferd Berfle

              I guess the terrorists were not impressed with bombing an aspirin factory.

              If Bush was given “poor intelliegence” as his apologists claim, then surely Clinton could have been as well, huh? At least have the courtesy of consistency.

              • retire05

                Ferd Berfle, you make my point exactly. Where was the intelligence that would have prevented the U.S.S. Cole, Kobar Towers, et al?

                Are we to assume that a just short 7 1/2 months after Bush took office, that the intelligence community suddenly became excellent in what they knew and reported it to the POTUS? No, I lay part of the responsibility for the failures to foresee these events on the intelligence agencies (not an opinion that will endear me to Larry).

                Remember, our involvement with Afghanistan goes all the way back to Charlie Wilson and what did he say? We dropped the ball. Got rid of Russia in Afghanistan and then, like in ’91 in Iraq, we walked away.

                • Ferd Berfle

                  Actually we never should have gone there. The Russians were on the brink of collapse anyway and all we did was train bin Laden. We are often our own worst enemies by failing to understand the potential consequences of our actions.

                • Betty Lou

                  It’s war.

                  Right?

                  Asymmetric war.

                  First rule, people die.

                  BTW, it really helps to know who funds these terrorists.

                  Without understanding the financial web, it’s very difficult to make black and white decisions.

                  Again, Cheney and Bush, and the democrats, too, take a lot, A LOT, of money from the Saudis, say, how does this affect law enforcements ability to stop an attack?

                  Sometimes, the corrupt politicians in our government are not our friend.

                  Would you agree?

        • C.S.

          I am not to blame for Soertoro/Obama or Bush.

          And being an independent I am not to blame for what the parties do. Political parties, who have control of the government, are responsible for the infighting, the laws, edicts and lapses in judgment.

          This day has been coming since Nixon corrupted the office of president to win; since Reagan corrupted the office of president with his arms for hostages deal; since George H. W. Bush told Saddam Hussein he wouldn’t mind if he annexed Kuwait and since his son decided that he was tired of “swatting [al Qaida] flies” in March 2001. And now a man whose real name and citizenship we don’t know will take GWB’s place and the only thing he hasn’t reneged on is building a private army! Not my fault that political parties have chosen the worst candidates and not the best for us to vote on.

        • Ferd Berfle

          Retire: the blame rests in a lot of places–like the fundamentalist Xtians who voted in the lowest numbers since 1980. The blame lies with Bush and his reckless incursion into Iraq. The blame lies with a do-nothing, rubber-stamp Congress who like to vacation more than legislating. The blame lies with regulatory agencies that did no regulating. The blame lies with voters who didn’t actually get informed, especially the supporters of that one. The blame lies with the media and its whorish support of that one. The blame lies in an American public that can’t be bothered to actually go out and god damn vote. The blame lies with an attitude that accountability doesn’t apply to polliticians or celebrities or persons of means. The blame lies with a country that values material things above all else. The blame lies with a country that is fooled by style and cannot comprehend substance and loves format but eschews content. The blame, Retire, belongs to us.

        • Snickers

          retire05, actually I voted straight Republican this year because my Party was so out of line and corrupt. I see it as a continuing trend in my voting pattern until balance has been restored. As for Bush and your fantasy about him keeping us safe and being such a gosh-wonderful president: put a sock in it. He’s been the worst president in this country’s history. You might want to start by looking at our economy (it’s in the toilet in case you didn’t notice) and then progress from there. Civil liberties have certainly been eroded under this “Uniter” and doing end run arounds both Congress and the Constition has not endeared this “Decider” to the nation either. Then there’s the war in Iraq which should never have been started, and you see why so many people voted for “That One.” Well I’m bitterly disappointed in this election fiasco and will continue to be so. But frankly, GWB set the stage for this to happen and now we’re all in a pretty nasty situation. But go ahead, keep defending “Mr. I Love To Read My Pet Goat.”

      • Right on the Left Coast

        Tek – As a dyed-in-the-wool conservative, I’m not going to argue with some of your points. I think your comment about Bush, with less than 9 months in office, caused 9/11 is a bit of a stretch. They were planning that attack for quite some time during the Clinton admin. But I’ll let that one slide as an comment out of frustration.

        As for your other comments, I certainly agree that we need to look at our parties objectively. Members of the Republican party have abandoned many of the principles that they used to capture congress in ’94. Particularly fiscal responsibility and limiting the role and power of government.

        I think during this cycle, the Democratic party has abandoned many principles it used to have as well.

        Unless Obama comes swinging back to the center, I think there will be a big opportunity for a leader to capture a large swath of people who were a bit underrepresented during this election. Let’s call those people the No Quarter electorate.

        Or, simply, the reasonable people.

        • gaindenpendent

          It’s called the center and we seem to have no party right now. The Dem party has been taken over by a bunch of cultists while the GOP is beholden to the religious right. I used to be a republican but I simply could not stand the totalitarian bent of people like Robertson and Falwell and left.

          If you guys could get back to your Eisenhower roots of smaller more efficient government, peach and prosperity you could clean up. Look at someone like Schwatzenegger in CA. Here’s a candidate winning statewide in a state that’s been blue for 16 years. Do what the Dems did to win–go to the states that are blue and look for candidates.

          Word to the wise–it’s hard to sell “limited government” when at the same time you want to regulate the bedrooms of this country. A socially liberal/moderate candidate who can talk about balanced budgets can win but people like you have to figure a way to get him or her out of the primary.

          • Ferd Berfle

            I agree completely–you are spot on in your analysis.

      • Dawnelle

        I agree

        W has done NOTHING except go awol for every BIG event

        he has NOT kept me safe from diddly! AMERICANS have kept me safe (since 911) now that they’ve had a wake up call

        W has done nothing but bully people and nations.
        BAmbi will be just the opposite
        he will give away the store now that it’s about worthless

        sad day

      • mimi

        Thank you. Bush/Cheney is the reason we have 0bama as POTUS-select. Along with the Republican’s disdain for McCain.

        What part of 10 million Repubs not voting last week aren’t people getting? Could it be any clearer? Duh!!! They did not want the WH this time, especially not with McCain/Palin.

        The Republicans are very disciplined. They put their trust in the US Constitution, which provide the Checks & Balances in the Executive branch of gov’t. Since no one could come up with any concrete, undeniable proof against 0bama, everything was dismissed as myth, hearsay, slander, rumor and of course racist.

        The Repubs are in a re-building phase. They know Bush destroyed the Party and the country and they need time to distance themselves from his shit stain. I’ve realized, unhappily, that they may be willing to sit out the next 8 years if 0bama’s luster doesn’t wane.

        If I had to bet on 2012, I think they’ll probably let Jindal, a man of color, face off against 0bama. As far as Palin is concerned, she has now replaced Hillary as the bulleye for demonization by the media. It remains to be seen if she can weather it. One thing I’ve learned, the press is very powerful in shaping opinion. Just witness 0bama.

        This is why my boycott will remain. I also think there should be some kind of watchdog group formed with regard to the press to keep them honest. An effective group.

        I’m not giving Bush a pass. If the Democratic Congress had impeached him and Cheney, maybe 0bama wouldn’t have had the momentum he enjoyed.

        Now we’ll never know.

        • Dawnelle

          good point

          I still think Nancy made a deal with the devil to NOT impeach W

          for something –

        • retire05

          mimi, your post is so off the mark I don’t know where to begin.

          Impeach Bush? My God, get some Prozac.

          Your boycott? Who the hell cares. You represent ONE vote. No more. And perhaps if you had stood up for honor, duty and service instead of a glitzy PR campaign, we would not have even gotten here.

          • Ferd Berfle

            The election of that one is partially attributable as a response to Bush and his failed policies. To see it any other way is to be looking through the wrong end of a telescope.

            • Galt’s Pizza Parlor

              Hey Ferd! Glad to see you are back. Obviously, nothing has changed around here. Same assholes still here. 😯

              • Ferd Berfle

                Evening–and you’re right, different day, same assholes.

          • mimi

            retire05,

            You should retire.

            I voted for McCain. WTF are you talking about?

            Bush/Cheney lied to us. Guess you forgot that part. What’s the body count now of troops in Iraq alone?

            Or do you think Sadaam Hussein was responsible for 911? Pity you.

            You like Bush/Cheney, fine. But they are the reason 0bama’s is POTUS.

            I could have gotten elected as a Democrat. It was no contest. Hillary would have slaughtered McCain. The Dems simply didn’t want her, they wanted him.

            Sure Bush may not be the whole picture, but he and his failed policies is a very HUGE part.

            BTW, I don’t take drugs. Maybe you should step away from whatever it is you’re smoking.

        • Betty Lou

          The Republicans are very disciplined. They put their trust in the US Constitution

          Dick Cheney, and David Addington?

          How did they protect the Constitution?

          They didn’t, “executive privilege” and torture among other rules Dick tried to implement, along with corporate welfare, taken as whole, kinda smell, don’t they?

          And you think Obama is dangerous?

          The Republicans don’t get a free pass.

          They broke the law, just like the democrats, they seem to think when it comes to protecting the Constitution, the CIA and military intelligence are inert organizations, organizations who somehow favor the extreme right, or favor illegal activities.

          Without law, the nation fails.

          Do you think this was, is being allowed, to happen?

          • mimi

            Is anyone at your door threatening your rights? NO!

            Try to follow the conversation.

            When I said the Repubs are disciplined and that they put their faith in the US Constitution, I am talking about their ability to sit out this election and wait their turn.

            There was a lot of hysteria around here over 0bama being dangerous, a threat to National Security, a socialist and maybe even a weapon to bring the country down.

            Do you really think if there was even one shred of hard evidence that any of the above were true and could be proven that 10 million Republicans would have stayed home? Or that insulted Hillary voters wouldn’t have crossed over and voted McCain if any of the stuff spouted here was backed up with something solid?

            The people who stayed home have faith that the Checks & Balances, which have worked since the beginning will hold up. And yes, even in W’s administration it held up.

            We’re all here. Bush did not call Marshall Law as it was rumored to stop the election. The process has gone like clockwork.

            So let’s watch and see how many of the Executive Orders 0bama gives back.

            Then we can have a conversation.

            In the meantime, fuck off!

            • Betty Lou

              When I said the Repubs are disciplined and that they put their faith in the US Constitution, I am talking about their ability to sit out this election and wait their turn.

              ————
              We’re here despite Cheney and Bush, and their attempts to deconstruct the Constitution, because the Republicans APPEAR to be compliant in ONE electoral instance doesn’t indicate they are somehow superior to the democrats — that’s what I took from your comment.

              Both parties have been horrifically contemptuous of the Constitution, Republicans advocating for torture, denying rights to those who may be innocently imprisoned in GITMO, FISA, the 4th amendment, et al.

              And the democrats were complicit.

              And I can only imagine what has gone on at the NSA.

              Respectful of the Constitution is the last thing I think of when I think Republican, lol.

              Same for the Democrats.

              I stand by my statement, it’s best not to forget what happened here, the republicans are NOT heroic.

              So, we will have to agree to disagree.

    • Rob G in Chicago

      Retire05:

      At least FDR attacked the same party that attacked the United States. Bush started out to do that, but he went in too light and outsourced our activities to the local warlords who chose sides based on who would pay them the most. Then because Rumsfeld said that he didn’t like to waste our smart bombs on dumb rocks, Bush went in search of a more target rich environment for shock and awe. You are assuming a direct cause and effect relationship between Bush’s activities and the fact that Osama has not been able to conduct a large scale mission on our soil since 2001, but there is also an argument to be made that Bush’s distraction in Iraq has worsened the threat of Islamic fundamentalism. Osama didn’t have to stage another attack inside of the U.S. One of his goals was to goad Bush into bankrupting the United States, and he seems to have been pretty successful on that score.

      • retire05

        Oh, please, do tell me when Hitler attacked us. I am all ears. Last time I read my history, it was the Japanese who attacked us at Pearl Harbor.

        But I am sick and tired of placing the blame for everything from the cost of McDonald’s Big Mac to dandruff on Bush. He had a goal. Not another 9-11 and for that, those like Pelosi and Reid tried to destroy him. Perhaps you should read the latest crap from the New York Slimes leaking how we have gone after AQ not matter where they are.

        Do you really think that has been helpful? Can you name me one time the media has not applied the scorched earth tactic to Bush since he entered office?

        And to bankrupting the U.S., no one is blameless. Barney Frank told us that the GSEs were in “great shape”. So now you are facing the very people who profited the most from Freddie/Fannie being appointed as Cheif of Staff and being considered for Attorney General (Jamie Gorelick). Perhaps you should read the articles written by Professor Liebowitz on the “impending doom” that was coming, written back in 1998.

        Do I buy that Bush has created more radical Islamofascists? Only if I believe that before Bush took them on, they were all just happy goat herders who only wanted to live in peace and harmony. And under your premise, now that Bush will be gone on January 20, 2009, can we anticipate that they will throw down their AK-47’s and go home?

        We are at war. A war against an evil that wears no uniform, gives no loyality to any nation. And those on the left did not give President Bush the support he needed, instead, they did every thing they could to smear him. Will I see that same thing with Obama? Don’t count on it.

        I want some damn honesty from everyone in order to protect this nation. And part of that honesty is admitting that the total failure of the left to support a president in a time of war has given us Obama.

        • Dawnelle

          I guess it gets down to YOUR interpretation of what is a WAR!!!

          W invaded a weaker nation to unseat a dictator that had NOTHING TO DO WITH 911!!

          what part of that does the “moonbat” right NOT UNDERSTAND?

          I STILL VOTED FOR MCCAIN

          cuz I think bambi is worse

          and I do think it’s a SIN/TRAGEDY/EVIL that so many thousands of innocent civilians were forced to abandon their homes, lives (no matter how you chose to catagorize living in the middle east) we still forced them to either FLEE or DIE

          THAT WAS WRONGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG!

          I STILL VOTED FOR MCCAIN

          ok?

          cuz I really really DO THINK ODRAMA and his ASSOCIATES are worse and were brought into being by all the SHIATE of the last 8 yrs

          it’s very clear really

          • Galt’s Pizza Parlor

            Wow, that is some revisionist history spewing from the Bush lovers. :mrgreen: And I voted for Mac as well, but was against the staged war in Iraq.

            • Ferd Berfle

              Evening, Galt.

              • Galt’s Pizza Parlor

                Have a free large uncured peperoni pizza on the house! :mrgreen:

                • Ferd Berfle

                  Can I get it with anchovies?

            • Dawnelle

              I’m not alone! Thank G:-) 🙂 DNESS!

              • Dawnelle

                G 🙂 😀 NESS?

                • Dawnelle

                  last time i promise

                  G 🙂 😀 DNESS

              • Ferd Berfle

                You were never alone. We’re still here, albeit reeling a bit. As for me, I had to take a week off from this fiasco as I was in a truly foul humor. The election of that one is not good.

                • Dawnelle

                  thank YOU 4 saying that

                  I’m on my 3rd trip up the parkway to stay CALM.

                  only good thing is gas is down to 2.13 a gallon over here so I’m able to just DRIVEEEEE!

              • TeakWoodKite

                Yikes, I never thought anyone else liked anchovy. I guess I am not alone.

        • Ferd Berfle

          Oh, please, do tell me when Hitler attacked us. I am all ears. Last time I read my history, it was the Japanese who attacked us at Pearl Harbor.

          And Germany declared war on us after we declared war on Japan. We had no choice but to aid the continent first. Japan had to wait, for militarily justifiable reasons. Bush had no such reasons. You are comparing pineapples to hand grenades, so to speak.

        • mimi

          So that you don’t waste your time and energy let me make myself perfectly clear:

          Bush/Cheney were a disaster!

          I don’t call feeling safe when an illegal war has created thousands of terrorists when before there were none.

          Where were you on Sept 11th?

          I was a mile away. I know a little bit about fear and wanting to be safe.

          Bush and his policies have created a climate where people now believe that the danger of being attacked inside the US is minimal.

          I can’t believe there are still numnuts who believe that the Iraq War has made us safe.

          Oh please! That’s delusional.

          Bush squandered our resources in the wrong place.

          Even if there’s an attack here within months after 0bama takes office, I will still blame Bush.

          Is that clear enough for you?

          • Strawberrybitch

            Crystal…and I agree. BUT Barky should have known that this is NOT a friggin’ game and he doesn’t the brains or balls to defend America. Hillary on the otherhand…

    • retire05,

      BDS was at its most apoplectic levels on the left when Bush was re-elected. If anything, BDS helped Bush. Lefties loved ‘Fahrenheit 911’ but it actually helped Bush — most Americans just don’t like the stereotype they think Michael Moore represents — scraggly bearded communist hippie burnout/traitor with fleas who thinks he’s smarter than you are. I don’t think you can lay that sub-Nixonian approval rating on BDS.

      Frankly, I’m furious at Americans who supported the war in 2003, voted for Bush in 2004 after we knew there were no WMDs, but now blame Bush for the war they demanded. Only when it hit us in our pocketbocks and U.S. casualties mounted did they object to the war. Repubs should have nominated McCain in 2000. The country should have dumped Bush in 2004.

      You can’t measure the Iraq blunder in casualties. The comparison to FDR’s blunders doesn’t fly. Of course, Pat Buchanan says FDR blundered into war with Japan. I think FDR wanted hegemony and was willing to pay the price of war to get it. Under Bush, America has lost hegemony. Speaking as a liberal nationalist, his name should not be mentioned in the same breath with FDR.

      I’m probably one of the few liberals who ever had anything good to say about John Ashcroft. In 2004, I was blogging that Ashcroft was the only competent member of Bush’s administration, and I say that as a full-on Constitutional groupie.

      And yes, I do fear for my life as a New Yorker now that Obama is president.

  • I still can’t figure out what the Obama movement stands for, other than Obama the man.

    We’re up to our eyeballs in debt, so new spending is unlikely. He ran against universal health care.

    He ran against Bill Clinton’s moderate policies, but his cult of personality politics may make him more of incrementalist than Clinton. I don’t see Obama leading any coalition for real change. There’s no money and no will, as far as I can tell.

    • Tristan

      Nobody knows what Obama is going to do because he told every interest group something different. That’s what makes it both so frightening and so comical.

      Ironically the only group he never made any promises to was the African Americans, and they voted for him simply because he’s half-Black, so that’s the one group he can’t possibly let down unless his pigmentation were to change somehow.

      • sowsear

        He did promise AAs their bill of rights:
        to a guaranteed job
        to their own home
        to an education
        for healthcare
        no tax hikes
        etc. (including a piece of your pie,
        from MO with love).

        • Betty Lou

          He did promise AAs their bill of rights:
          to a guaranteed job
          to their own home
          to an education
          for healthcare
          no tax hikes
          etc. (including a piece of your pie,
          from MO with love).

          Hey just like Cheney and the oil companies, but he promised them the rights to Iraqi oil, and the rest of the middle east.

          No difference.

          BTW, that lil deal excludes people like me, and you.

    • sowsear

      We have no money, have borrowed heavily already, and yet,Congress keeps talking bailout for every slipshod entity murmuring alms for the poor, alms for the poor.

      • Ferd Berfle

        Oh, and don’t forget the reparations. I’m sure that’s high on that one’s little list.

        • athy

          Fred,
          I agree…

          I never quite understood what Barack Obama’s Obama”s position was/is regarding US reparations for slavery in the US, and from western and ex-colonial European powers for Africa and African nations.

          During the 2001 UN-sponsored World Conference against Racism, many African nations demanded an apology-plus other things- from ex-colonial European nations for the role they (European nations) had in promoting the slave trade.

          I was curious why Barack Obama and no one in his campaign team ever discussed this very important “race” issue.

          http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/africa/09/01/durban.slavery/index.html

          Last year Sen Obama supported the very controversial 3rd ward Ald. Dorothy Tillman in her runoff against an independent candidate.

          Tillman is one of the most important and outspoken U.S advocates of reparations for slavery.

          http://www.suntimes.com/news/miller/309639,CST-EDT-MILL23.article

          SunTimes Commentary- “Will 3rd Ward politics affect Obama’s presidential race? ” by Rich Miller 3/23/07

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorothy_Tillman

          • Ferd Berfle

            He can just forget that one entirely. No one alive was a slave and no one alive was a slave owner. If they want reparations for slavery, then I want reparation for my ancestor’s deaths caused by the Civil War. Fair is fair.

  • Juliet16

    Larry,

    Just wondered what YOUR take is on this:

    On November 9th in http://www.israpundit.com/2008/ at the end of Ted Belman’s “Barack Obama for Better or Worse” there is a comment (comment #8 from the top Comment by Michael Sunstar — November 8, 2008 @ 12:09 pm) in which the person posits a “conspiracy theory” that Obama may be an ex-CIA operative.

    That theory, if true, could explain why so many both Dems and Republicans have given him a pass.

    Sure, it may be very very far-fetched, but on the other hand…COULD it be true?

    I am interested in hearing feedback on this.

    • Betty Lou

      Obama may be an ex-CIA operative.

      Like Putin, Obama is like Putin?

    • J.J. (The Puma)

      A double agent, maybe.

      • Ferd Berfle

        Nah. Double-nought, like Jethro Bodine. If that one was an operative, we are in knee-deep in manure.

        • sowsear

          Jethro is MENSA next to “That One”

    • athy

      Juliet 16,
      cant rule out that he is not involved with CIA…Read this interview of webster Tarpley-especially focus on the possible role of Z Brzezinski during Obama Columbia years…

      http://www.deepjournal.com/p/7/a/en/1497.html

      The men behind Obama: interview with Webster Tarpley

      By Daan de Wit

      EXCERPT:

      Especially in politics it is of the utmost importance to try to look behind the facade: who makes up the team of the presidential candidate? The future president of the United States of America is for a large part dependent on and being fed by his team of advisors and future cabinet members. Webster Tarpley wrote a book on the men and women behind presidential hopeful Barack Obama. He argues that there is more to Obama than his charismatic appearance and that some of his advisors pose a danger to the US and the world in case Obama might be elected to become the next US president. Whether Tarpleys view is correct for now is a matter of opinion and remains to be seen, but for the public debate it is relevant to take note of his facts and arguments. Therefor DeepJournal interviewed Webster Tarpley on the topic of his recently published book Obama, The Postmodern Coup,The Making of a Manchurian Candidate.

    • Bob

      Comment by Juliet16 | 2008-11-10 17:12:00

      Obama may be an ex-CIA operative.

      This is an amazing website. No matter how many times I come back, there are always new crackpot theories being advanced. I’m tempted to think the people doing this are just spoofing noquarter, but there are so many of these crazy posts that it seems many of them have to be genuine. And that’s scary.

      I had a chance conversation with a stranger once in a hotel lobby. We ended up talking about 9/11, which prompted him to say, “At least we got the guy that did it.” He saw the puzzled look on my face and explained: Saddam Hussein. It was a chilling experience, because I realized there were probably untold numbers of other people like him — stupifyingly ignorant about what is going on in the world.

      Noquarter has opened a window onto a chilling strain of psychosis: people who believe/expect/crave the worst things their fevered minds can imagine. It seems that part of what brings them here is, like for Juliet16, the prospect of having their delusions ratified by fellow travelers in their intellectual wasteland.

      Look at what they say: Obama is a CIA plant. His campaign won by keeping Republicans from voting. The GOP deliberately threw the election. Russia is going to invade Alaska because the media has made Palin look weak. Sell your home and put the cash in an off-shore bank, because America is about to descend into Khmer Rouge-type totalitarianism. People who say they hate/fear everyone and everything now because Hillary didn’t win the Democratic primary.

      Do these types constitute a worrisome percentage of the population? Or are they exceptionally rare, and noquarter just gives them the means to find each other? Those are questions that really should be discussed here.

      • Dawnelle

        Do these types constitute a worrisome percentage of the population?

        yes we’re HERE like bugs on a glass

        JUST for you!

        pompous narrow minded koolaid dolts need not bother

        unless they’re planning to write yet ANOTHER snore of a book!

        Theories abound – some count

        • Bob

          Comment by Dawnelle | 2008-11-10 19:01:32

          yes we’re HERE like bugs on a glass
          JUST for you!
          pompous narrow minded koolaid dolts need not bother
          unless they’re planning to write yet ANOTHER snore of a book!
          Theories abound – some count

          Bugs on a windshield? Or on a microscope slide?

          What book?

      • nationalert

        Bob,

        This IS a genuine question. What did you think of Bush BEFORE he was elected. The world is now crying, yet he was good enough to win. So how do you reconcile this? And no I’m not necessarily drawing a parallel to Obama.

        I will be impressed if you respond with a reasonable answer.

      • mimi

        Bob,

        I don’t believe any of the things you listed. And I certainly would bet good money that 0bama is NOT a CIA operative.

        I believe the Repubs stayed home because they wanted to. They didn’t want the WH, especially not with McCain/Palin.

        Yes, some people have posted absurdities here, but the majority of people don’t buy into them.

        You know the most absurd thing? Is that you’re here even bothering to have a conversation with us “nutjobs.”

        What does that say about you?

    • elvin

      Regarding the hypothesis Obama=CIA agent.

      The game of “spot-the-spook,” or researching the background of individuals to detect infiltration by intelligence agencies, is one of the most basic and common security measures carried out by political groups, security forces, etc.

      It takes some training and knowledge to do so, but once you have learned how intelligence agencies function, and what kind of biographies their personnel tend to have, you can “spot the spook” with a fair degree of accuracy. If this were not the case, Security Directors all over the world would be out of a job.

      The question at the outset is not “Is this person a spook,” but rather “which of these 10 people is a spook.” You then examine their backgrounds and come to a conclusion. It is the business of intelligence agencies to infiltrate their people into the leadership of political formations. The question is not “Are they doing this” but rather “Where are they doing this.”

      That said, let’s look at Obama’s background to try and figure out whether he is one of the CIA’s agents in the domestic political arena:

      Obama’s mother was a CIA officer.

      Obama was one of 8 students selected to study sovietology in Columbia’s IR program under Brzezinski, one of the CIA’s top-ranking officers. “Sovietology” is CIA training.

      Obama went to work for a CIA front, Business International Corporation (one of whose specialties was recruiting leaders of domestic left-wing organizations as CIA assets).

      Obama ran for state office and his opponent quit the race before the election.

      Obama ran for US Senate, and his opponent quit the race before the election.

      Obama ran for Pres., and his foreign policy chief was, who else, one of the CIA’s top officers, Brzezinski.

      Obama’s communications director, Ted Sorenson, was nominated for Director of Central Intelligence.

  • La Compania Volante

    It is quite likely that the question of Iran will not be decided by the present or coming administration, but by the outcome of the political power struggle that is taking place in Israel right now. The war clouds are quite visible.

  • Betty Lou

    If Iran is put on the defensive with a potential Syrian-Israel agreement, how is Iran predicted to respond? Does it open the door to more diplomacy
    ———
    IMO, the only thing they (Iran’s current govt) really understand, along with their Russian brethren (current incarnation), is economic stress.

    This, sometimes, too affects the willingness of a nation to bargain, much like Kim, and N Korea.

    But it’s a slow process.

    Bombs don’t solve a thing, only exacerbate the problem, IMO, anyway.

    • drkate

      I agree, bombs don’t solve anything. But economic sanctions can be deadly and targeted, like water supplies, medicines, water treamtent chemicals.

      Those are ‘bombs’ of a different kind. What is the long term view?

      • Betty Lou

        Not economic sanctions per se, but really, Iran, through it’s state sponsored terrorism, can be said to affect world economic conditions, (right, even the constant psychological stress of terrorism can be said to affect world markets, wasn’t this a goal of Osama’s terrorism?) for the sake of argument, let’s say it is; this will destabilize their own economy as well.

        Like Kim, the isolation and the mismanagement will break them, causing GRAVE internal political instability as well.

        A slow decay, really, direct confrontation does not work, for any number of reasons it leads to a never ending game of cat and mouse, one the US cannot win if it doesn’t recognize the greater psychology at work.

        Let’s say, again for argument’s sake, Iran wants to draw the US into “shock and awe” wars, using the terrorist attack as bait, intending to bleed us economically and psychologically, much like Iraq has done (economically, anyway).

        If we recognize this as a legitimate tactic, on their part, how can we turn it around?

        I think of the terrorist attack as bait, the beginning of a cat and mouse game on the part of the terrorist — a little attack here, we respond, say, it quiets, we go back to some fomer level of normailty, and then, another attack, somewhere else — we repsond even more panicked. This can go on for years, the US continually declining with each go around (in theory, anyway).

        How can the US seize control of the situation, then, without falling to the bait, once it understands the tactic?

        • Dawnelle

          until we as a world break the cycle of violence that is THOUSANDS of years OLD

          it’s the same game
          different generation

          and I think this is a very very old habit that won’t break very easily!!

          sadly 🙁

    • Doc99

      The best way to deal with Iran is to take a page from W and announce the fast-tracking of offshore drilling – something Obama’s on record as opposing. That would send shockwaves throughout OPEC and drive the price of crude significantly lower. Since Iran’s, and Venezuela’s, economy depends on oil sales, that economy, presently teetering over the abyss, would head for Zimbabwe territory. Then you’d get a more receptive response from the Mullacracy. Of course, that’s just my opinion. I could be wrong.

      • The amount of domestic reserves we can tap into are minuscule. The oil won’t be on line for a decade. Oil is a global resource we export “our” oil to Japan while importing from Mexico, Saudi Arabia etc. We passed peak oil in the USA back in the Carter Administration. Drilling in ANWAR and offshore won’t work; there are just are not the reserves. Drill baby drill is a nice bumper sticker but it is not smart policy. We need to figure out how to live in a post-oil world.

    • athy

      Betty Lou-
      Read my comment above to Dr Kate.

      During the past few years since Brzezinski wrote the Grand Chessboard, he (ZB) has been on the msm circuit advocating “Soft Diplomacy”.

      IMO, I read this as trying to accomplish the same thing except now you are using economic pressure (TREMENDOUS Pressure- to the point of blackmail) to reach your goals.

      Instead of attacking a country directly- you go doing it in a round about way- Their financial infrastructure & economy.So-hundreds of thousands of people get killed and property gets transferred from least powerful to most powerful except now…you cant tell who the aggressor is because it is all done behind the scenes- using banking, finance and other systems to bring countries to their knees.

      “Confessions of an Economic Hitman- EXCELLENT BOOK- try to read if you can.

      Learn the meaning of SOFT DIPLOMACY…

  • drkate

    Great analysis, Larry, and it will be interesting to see this evolve. There will be many, unfortunately, who will be disappointed…

    Question–If Iran is put on the defensive with a potential Syrian-Israel agreement, how is Iran predicted to respond? Does it open the door to more diplomacy? Is an Obama team likely to think beyond an immediate goal to “handling” potential Iranian responses? Thx in advance!

    • downWithMSM

      *Breaking news* Breaking! Dean will step down as chair of the DNC. James Carville may take his place!
      Some of Dean’s most vocal detractors were former advisers to President Clinton. They include strategist James Carville, who once called Dean’s leadership at the DNC “almost Rumsfeldian in its incompetence.”

      • Mary

        Uh, no. Claire McCaskill has been chosen to be the figurehead leader of the DNC, with Obama’s operatives actually running it.

        • Dawnelle

          perhaps Rosemary Claire Mc will NEXT be chosen to birth his BABY!!

          can’t STAND that TRAITOR biotch ya’ll! not ONE bit.

      • mimi

        I popped a bottle of champagne when I heard this. This was the best news in a very long time.

        Maybe that’s why many Clinton people supported BO. If Carville gets this, it should be interesting. But I wait with baited breath as events unfold.

        I’m just glad Dean’s gone.

    • Dawnelle

      WAsssuP Doc? taptap! 😉

    • athy

      drKate-
      This MIGHT help answer your question.
      Read about Z.Brzezinski world view & US role in it…

      http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a1097chessboard

      EXCERPT:

      September 4, 1997: Brzezinski’s ‘The Grand Chessboard’ Advocates Overthrow of Iranian Goverment Pre-orders of Zbigniew Brzezinski’s new book, “The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives” goes on sale at Amazon.com. In the book Brzezinski details how in order to protect America’s status as the last remaining super power on earth it would be necessary to invade and control key locations in the Middle East, particularly Iran. The book theorizes that America could be attacked by Afghan terrorists which would lead to our invasion of Afghanistan and ultimately control of Iran as a key strategic country to hold in the war for global supremacy. [Brzezinski, 1997]

  • John Smith

    Don’t bet on any of it. The financial mess is beyond anybodies comprehension. It will shape us policy in the world and not the POTUS. There is only so much money out there and eventually there will be a need to cut spending some where. Iraq will be the first place then Afghanistan. At this point in time it is the economy that will push the US Gov around as I said before BO will be lucky if he can keep the lights on in the White House.

  • Pennsylvania Red

    Why? The first piece of evidence is Proposition 8. California, the so-called land of moderate progressives, passed Proposition 8 last Tuesday banning homosexual marriage. Now if that happens in California, what do you think would happen in Kentucky, Kansas or Iowa? At least on the matter of personal sexual conduct when it comes to homosexuality America is very, very conservative.

    Yes that’s probably the most obvious example of conservatism demonstrated this election.

    Another way we are conservative is in our contempt for too much taxation. Our country was founded on a tax revolt, and if 0’bannion’s administration ends up in a tug of war between the latte liberals and those expecting entitlements (among his cult following), take one guess who is going to win.

    • BernieO

      Yet a large percentage of people want abortion to be legal. And a lot of people are OK with civil unions. We are willing to elect a black man, but stand by when women running for high office are subjected to over-the-top misogyny. A very mixed bag.

  • Betty Lou

    If the Obama team goes in that direction they might get a breakthrough in the Middle East that has seemed so elusive.
    ———-

    Problem is the bait and switch, everything being so disingenuous, these days, everyone has a trick up their sleeves.

    I only hope they go in with their eyes open, North Korean type diplomacy seems to be the flavor of the day, never rising above this level of intellectual game playing, for lack of a better word.

    And I don’t think the approval of 8 was reflective of a greater center right conservatism. I think it had to do with a larger AA voter turnout, per Obama, AAs, as a group, being less accepting of the GLBT community.

    But I do think the country is progressing, slowly, anyway.

    • mimi

      I wish people would provide links backing up the assertion that it was the AA community in CA that killed Prop 8.

        • Betty Lou

          On my local news, one of the pro 8 ladies credited the AA community with helping ot defeat the initiative, saying it was that community, coming out in large number for Obama, who helped put the numbers over the top.

          In addition, the Village Voice cites AA homophobia as a cause of the higher AIDS rates among AA, those engaging in high risk gay sex.

          http://www.villagevoice.com/2000-06-20/news/black-gay-at-risk/1

          Excellent articles, btw, you should read them, you’ll look informed, and impress people.

          http://www.nblca.org/capacitybooks/HIV_AIDS_among_African_Americans%5B1%5D.pdf

        • mimi

          Thank you for the links.

          But although blacks voted 7 out of 10, the article states that blacks and latinos combined appeared to tip the balance.

          But the quote below shows that AAs certainly weren’t alone:

          “Exit poll results also highlighted geographic splits in sentiment. In California’s suburbs, where half the electorate lives, sixty percent of voters supported Proposition 8. City dwellers opposed the measure by a slightly smaller margin overall, though voters in Los Angeles were evenly divided.

          “More than half of voters in the largely conservative cities and suburbs south and east of Los Angeles backed the ban, as did about two-thirds of Central Valley voters.”

          Just for the record.

          • Betty Lou

            I was disappointed in part because Obama could have used his influence as an African American to LEAD the AA community, to lead ALL Americans, helping to create an atmosphere of tolerance, and acceptance.

            Our country progresses when it overcomes it’s bigotry.

            I think Bobby Kennedy, most obviously, and his ability to lead and guide in terms of race. When the country progresses civilly, it progresses economically, and culturally, too.

            Even Bill, and Hillary were, are, very vocal in their support of the LGBT community, and I admire their leadership, their acceptance of others promotes acceptance among the population.

            Obama, OTOH, squashed the issue, seemed, to me anyway, to FEED on the cultural divides, like Rove, part of this new “democratic” agenda to disparage the rights of others, the politics of exclusion in regard to women, and the LGTB community.

            I can feel this is going to stink, in terms of this Obama “democratic” crew — OTOH, it’s opened my eyes to some strong political leadership within the LGBT community, and I’m impressed, people who put their money where their money is, people who exhibit personal courage, the kind needed to lead this country, personal honesty combined with brains.

            Among the Hillary supporters, the LGTB community, as well as women, (and others, certainly) were among the first to notice, to smell, something wasn’t right with Obama…

            Actions speak louder than words, isnt it obvious?

  • FenelonSpoke

    ^^Do not feed the trolls

  • cackicoo

    oh thank you larry johnson
    thank you for a place to come a share some sanity in a world gone mad for NOTHING…..they will all be disappointed soon enough…and i am so thankful for your site and the few others like it!

    • Dawnelle

      They are pro-Israel but anti-likud. Prospects of war with Iran are probably reduced with this crowd.

      this would be a good thing, no? I’m glad to read it.

      Question Larry, has this been asked of you yet?

      Who might Barry pick as his “Gonzalez”

      What about his “Rummie”

      have you heard anything?

      I read Kerry is pushing for himself as SOS (lmao)

    • Chicago Joe

      BHO is “READY TO RULE” per Valerie Jarrett

      The co-chair of Barack Obama’s Transition Team, Valerie Jarrett, appeared on Meet the Press this weekend and used, shall we say, an interesting word to described what she thinks Barack Obama will be doing in January when he’s officially sworn into office. She told Tom Brokaw that Obama will be ready to “rule” on day one. It’s a word that reflects the worst fears that people have for Obama the “arrogant,” the “messiah,” that imagines he’s here to “rule” instead of govern.

      Jarret told Brokaw that “given the daunting challenges that we face, it’s important that president elect Obama is prepared to really take power and begin to rule day one

      • mimi

        RULE??????

        WTF?????

        These people are out of their skulls.

        How long do they think they will get away with this crap?

        Politics is ultimately about perception. And using the right words is key.

        This is one of the reasons I want to give this man enough space to self-destruct. If we don’t start harping in a big way before he’s even sworn in, then the focus will be on him.

        Even now, the msm can’t focus on him. They’re still hammering away at Palin. It’s time she shooed them away, admonishing them with “Shouldn’t you be covering the “President-elect“?

        I don’t intend to become the focus. I want to see what happens when the msm has to focus just on what he’s doing.

        RULE????

        This is General Haig moment: “I am in control of the WH.” After Reagan’s assassination attempt.

        Someone should tell the poor woman that the word is govern.

        Dictators rule. Presidents govern