Tuesday, November 25, 2008

A Note on Obama

Wow, the Obama honeymoon isn't lasting long at all, is it?

Scanning the headlines on What Really Happened today, a couple of stories sort of leapt out at me. One was a simple list of those Obama's tipped for cabinet positions. Bankers, zio-cons, and neo-cons, and neo-libs (none of those labels mutually exclusive mind you) to a man, or woman as the case may be.

Yep. "Change"!

This other morsel that really caught me was this:

A senior Obama campaign official shared with The Washington Note that in July 2008, the McCain and Obama camps began to work secretly behind the scenes to assemble large rosters of potential personnel for the administration that only one of the candidates would lead.


So no matter who won, it would be largely the same - if not precisely the same - people in charge (with the sole exceptions being the president and the vice-president, of course. ) Call me crazy if you will, but would Hope not have implied that one option differed significantly from the other?

I do wonder just how long it will take to seep in to the zeitgeist just how thoroughly the masses got pwned this time 'round.

Addendum
I'd be remiss if I didn't link to SOTT's take on this whole fiasco in their latest weekly economics summary, Sleepwalking Our Way to Hell.

7 comments:

nina said...

Interesting watching the pundits today screaming at each other, some, not all, know perfectly well what is going on. That "some" were keeping their insights to themselves although they tripped over it often in arguments. They want to keep their jobs. Imagine how far out there they've gone on pundit paychecks?

Matthew Shultz said...

I find it instructive to watch them on mute, sometimes. Who they are speaks so loudly you don't need to hear what they're saying ... in fact, it gets in the way, sometimes. All you have to do is look at their faces, the lines etched there by years - decades - of continuous, conscious lying. The makeup and wardrobe departments are first rate, I'm sure, and no doubt many of them indulge in plastic surgery; but none of that adds up to a picture of Dorian Grey.

nina said...

I'm going to try the mute. I get very tired of them interpreting and reinterpreting, adding possibility on top of official stories, burying our own analysis. They're like endless snow.
I had a sense I'd seen you around before, Matthew, now I know from where! I don't usually get vocal on TWN unless its an art subject because the person I live with is a regular commenter and that's his favorite forum. It makes for a better friendship, I think, to have our own areas of expertise and experience. So, I get a lot of "Hey, look at this one!" Which is neat. Sharing is always neat.

psychegram said...

Sorry, TWN? I'm not sure what that is....

I totally hear you about hitting mute. I'm trying to pay as little attention as possible to anything associated with politicians; they have no real power, one way or the other, outside of their purely symbolic roles within the ceremonial political arena.

At this point, and within those ceremonial constraints, about the only thing Obama could do that would be of any substance would be to die. If, despite all his rhetoric of change, he takes the easy path of enacting policies dictated by his owners, he'll have proved himself a puppet. If he takes a stand against them, as JFK did, he'll end up like JFK. Sad to say but this is the only route by which Obama might gain any power of real substance, as an offering sacrificed on the alter of truth: he would become a martyr of almost religious reverence, with the circumstances of his death serving to awaken so many to the reality of the NWO that it could not possibly survive.

On the other hand, if Obama plays it 'safe', his name will become associated with deeply unpopular policy decisions as the US spirals ever deeper into Hell on Earth. The honeymoon will end, the makeup will come off, the wrinkles will spread and before long he'll be as divisive a hate-magnet as Bush.

Whether Obama possesses the wisdom to choose the right path, that's the real question now. Time will tell. For now, there's no point in giving him further attention.

nina said...

H-h-hold everything. Are Psychegram and Matthew Schultz one and the same? I once thought so, but now I don't know.
TWN = The Washington Note.

Psychegram, I saw your favorite film list just now and those are my favorite films too! Add in the 1992 remake of Wuthering Heights for a firm foundation in compounded evil. It comes around sometimes on the movie channels.

psychegram said...

Ahh, I see the problem. Unfortunately for me (or perhaps not, depending on the circumstances), Matthew and Shultz are both very common names. I hate to tell you this, but I've never once in my life commented at The Washington Note.

nina said...

I see. LOL, starting over here. I really liked your comment this morning on SM. A few months back I had a dream about Les wearing turquoise slacks, Nobody and Mike Rivero were in the dream, it went on and on, lots of details... so I emailed Les and told him all about it. The reply was "teal is my favorite color."

About the Signs piece, I don't know why Donald isn't writing without the assistance of a SOTT editor lately. This latest article shows he's gotten around that obstacle and coming through in his classic brilliant fashion anyway. Thanks for reminding me to stay with him.

Sorry about the mixup. Glad we're more clear.