What is Obama’s True Personality?
This endless race to the American presidency is coming to an end, and historians will be able to name a few reasons to the almost certain victory of Barack Obama: the economical crisis, the war in Iraq, the desire of strong change after eight disastrous years under the "reign" of George Bush; not to mention John McCains awful grimaces during a recent debate, whereas his opponent always had a smiling face.
However, the true story of the Obama phenomenon is mostly an unpublished one, at least in the popular imagination. A large part of the American people and of the most influencing media, in fear of one last trick from the Republican Frankenstein symbolized by McCain, doesnt want to hear any critics on the origins or ideas of their new savior. I cant blame them, I was, myself, completely desperate to see McCain, whos not a stupid man though, expressing such a rubbish as: America never lost a battle in Vietnam, or Sarah Palin is a reformer who will be my partner. Nevertheless, before crowning the young Democrat candidate and celebrating the extraordinary symbol represented by the arrival of a black man at the White House, maybe pointing out the real defections, hypocrisies and, which sounds even more important, the essentially conservative spirit of the true Obama would be necessary. Let us keep in mind that the Obama character was created by advertising agencies and propaganda. John McCain still can speak about bonds between Obama and the terrorist- William Ayers, the African-American candidate is in no way a threat to the American status quo.
First of all, Obama doesnt have any reform project. The Democrat party hes from represents an oligarchic power. Obama was turned out in Chicago by the citys Mayor, Richard M. Daley, and a city council, which 49 seats out of 50 are occupied by members of his party Obama exaggerates his supportive fondness. Without Daleys allmighty support, the Democrat candidate would now be the president of a senatorial committee in the state of Illinois, instead of standing on the doorstep of the presidential residence.
As a member of the Democrat political machine, Obama gave the idea of reforming the financing system devolved to election campaigns up. With an astronomical amount of more than $600 million in his electoral coffer, the new leader of the Democrat party wont need to set limits to what electoral money is used for. Theres much talk about those hundreds of thousand donors who support Obama with donations reaching less than $100, but these impressive figures hide the predominance of donations regrouped in some financial and business sectors, as well as for lobbyists. The majority of donations Obama received ($740,000) comes from the very influential bank Goldman Sachs, home of the present Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, and Obamas main adviser Robert Rubin, former Treasury Secretary of the Clinton administration. How ironic to hear John McCain, the candidate of the traditional business party, reproach his so called socialist opponent to be overzealous when it comes to the private sector. McCains approval of the elections public financing is a millstone round his neck. The $84 million he received from the American Treasury (even added to the considerable funds he gets from the Republican Party) look pitiful compared to the sums Obama received ($150 million) just for the month of September).
On the other hand, Obama is neither a pro-peace nor an anti-war candidate, although he did claim before it really started that he is against the invasion of Iraq. However, since his nomination at the federal Senate, his votes, either in favor of the financing of the occupation, or for a chosen date to withdraw the troops, have been very careful, and even identical to his rivals ones, the liberal falcon Hillary Clinton. As for his avowed will to put an end to the war in Iraq at the lasted 16 months after being nominated, rumors talk about an already broken promise. Obamas circle is full of old counselors of the former president Bill Clinton, among which liberal interventionists such as Anthony Lake, who still believe in the possibility to establish a democracy in the Far East. These supporters of a humanitarian interference are on Obamas side and fermly agree that the war against terrorism should move away to Afghanistan, which is an even more murderous mess than the Iraqi one.
This all doesnt mean Obama will be a good president. If the Democrat majority at the Congress, especially at the Senate is increased, Obama could feel free from the constraints directly bound to the emergency tactics of a campaign. He is after all a liberal intellectual quoted on the back cover on one of the great philosopher and theologian Reinhold Niebuchs books one of my favourite philosophers- Firstly, having a president who could name a few philosophers already sounds rather encouraging. Obamas basic ideas in favor of free trade and national safety would be likely to hide more interesting politics.
Moreover, a Black man at the White House (even if his mother is a White lady) could also be an inspiration to the constantly disinherited African-Americans, always at disadvantage in comparison of the White people, on an economical and political level. An astounding figure: nowadays in the U.S, among Black men aged 18 to 24, 10.5 percent, that is to say almost 200,000 of them are in jail.
Im not a supporter of Republican gestures, but this one might lead to a fairer society.
I cant help feeling pessimistic though: because of the economical crisis, president Obama will find it tough to keep his campaign promises, especially to what is health insurance related. Obama showed himself much less ambitious when he had to vote the Wall Street salvage plan that had been proposed by the Bush administration. As he was confronted to a riot at the representative Chamber (the Peoples House), Obama, along with John McCain, incited his hesitating colleagues to vote a law, which gives the Treasury secretary, one of the architect of the crisis during his career at Goldman Sachs, $700 billion to rescue his friend thanks to the taxpayers money. Maybe the real election - the referendum on reform and popular sovereignty - has already taken place.
However, the true story of the Obama phenomenon is mostly an unpublished one, at least in the popular imagination. A large part of the American people and of the most influencing media, in fear of one last trick from the Republican Frankenstein symbolized by McCain, doesnt want to hear any critics on the origins or ideas of their new savior. I cant blame them, I was, myself, completely desperate to see McCain, whos not a stupid man though, expressing such a rubbish as: America never lost a battle in Vietnam, or Sarah Palin is a reformer who will be my partner. Nevertheless, before crowning the young Democrat candidate and celebrating the extraordinary symbol represented by the arrival of a black man at the White House, maybe pointing out the real defections, hypocrisies and, which sounds even more important, the essentially conservative spirit of the true Obama would be necessary. Let us keep in mind that the Obama character was created by advertising agencies and propaganda. John McCain still can speak about bonds between Obama and the terrorist- William Ayers, the African-American candidate is in no way a threat to the American status quo.
First of all, Obama doesnt have any reform project. The Democrat party hes from represents an oligarchic power. Obama was turned out in Chicago by the citys Mayor, Richard M. Daley, and a city council, which 49 seats out of 50 are occupied by members of his party Obama exaggerates his supportive fondness. Without Daleys allmighty support, the Democrat candidate would now be the president of a senatorial committee in the state of Illinois, instead of standing on the doorstep of the presidential residence.
As a member of the Democrat political machine, Obama gave the idea of reforming the financing system devolved to election campaigns up. With an astronomical amount of more than $600 million in his electoral coffer, the new leader of the Democrat party wont need to set limits to what electoral money is used for. Theres much talk about those hundreds of thousand donors who support Obama with donations reaching less than $100, but these impressive figures hide the predominance of donations regrouped in some financial and business sectors, as well as for lobbyists. The majority of donations Obama received ($740,000) comes from the very influential bank Goldman Sachs, home of the present Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, and Obamas main adviser Robert Rubin, former Treasury Secretary of the Clinton administration. How ironic to hear John McCain, the candidate of the traditional business party, reproach his so called socialist opponent to be overzealous when it comes to the private sector. McCains approval of the elections public financing is a millstone round his neck. The $84 million he received from the American Treasury (even added to the considerable funds he gets from the Republican Party) look pitiful compared to the sums Obama received ($150 million) just for the month of September).
On the other hand, Obama is neither a pro-peace nor an anti-war candidate, although he did claim before it really started that he is against the invasion of Iraq. However, since his nomination at the federal Senate, his votes, either in favor of the financing of the occupation, or for a chosen date to withdraw the troops, have been very careful, and even identical to his rivals ones, the liberal falcon Hillary Clinton. As for his avowed will to put an end to the war in Iraq at the lasted 16 months after being nominated, rumors talk about an already broken promise. Obamas circle is full of old counselors of the former president Bill Clinton, among which liberal interventionists such as Anthony Lake, who still believe in the possibility to establish a democracy in the Far East. These supporters of a humanitarian interference are on Obamas side and fermly agree that the war against terrorism should move away to Afghanistan, which is an even more murderous mess than the Iraqi one.
This all doesnt mean Obama will be a good president. If the Democrat majority at the Congress, especially at the Senate is increased, Obama could feel free from the constraints directly bound to the emergency tactics of a campaign. He is after all a liberal intellectual quoted on the back cover on one of the great philosopher and theologian Reinhold Niebuchs books one of my favourite philosophers- Firstly, having a president who could name a few philosophers already sounds rather encouraging. Obamas basic ideas in favor of free trade and national safety would be likely to hide more interesting politics.
Moreover, a Black man at the White House (even if his mother is a White lady) could also be an inspiration to the constantly disinherited African-Americans, always at disadvantage in comparison of the White people, on an economical and political level. An astounding figure: nowadays in the U.S, among Black men aged 18 to 24, 10.5 percent, that is to say almost 200,000 of them are in jail.
Im not a supporter of Republican gestures, but this one might lead to a fairer society.
I cant help feeling pessimistic though: because of the economical crisis, president Obama will find it tough to keep his campaign promises, especially to what is health insurance related. Obama showed himself much less ambitious when he had to vote the Wall Street salvage plan that had been proposed by the Bush administration. As he was confronted to a riot at the representative Chamber (the Peoples House), Obama, along with John McCain, incited his hesitating colleagues to vote a law, which gives the Treasury secretary, one of the architect of the crisis during his career at Goldman Sachs, $700 billion to rescue his friend thanks to the taxpayers money. Maybe the real election - the referendum on reform and popular sovereignty - has already taken place.
Previous article![]( "One American Out of Three Voted Before the Elections")
