Monday, November 17, 2008

Obama Risks Clinton-Era Mistakes

By Robert Parry
November 17, 2008

After a masterful campaign, Barack Obama seems headed toward some fateful mistakes as he assembles his administration by heeding the advice of Washington’s Democratic insider community, a collective group that represents little “change you can believe in.”

Read on.

14 comments:

fact checker said...

It has never been clear that Obama represents real change.

Mr. Parry claims Obama ran a brilliant campaign. No, he ran a campaign that was largely unscrutinized by an incurious media.

Buyers' remorse before January 20, 2009?

Anonymous said...

There is no "mistake" being made here. Obama never, ever had any intention of investigating or pursuing Bush lawlessness. To believe otherwise reflects the sort of naivete and wishful thinking that so often characterizes old-fashioned New Deal Democrats: on the one hand, unable to accept the reality of a Democratic Party that is literally defined by the David Borens/Sam Nunns/Lee Hamiltons (and, we might add, the Rahm Emanuels), on the other hand, not willing to definitively break with the Democrats; hence, always lodging New Deal-esqe (and/or Watergate-esque) illusions in the next new Democratic kid on the block.

Earth to Mr. Perry! Although your heart is in the right place, please recognize what ought to be obvious: The Democrats will NEVER investigate Republicans.

fact checker said...

I think Anony is right. There won't be meaningful investigations.

The Obama administration will probably shut down Gitmo (tho I'm not convinced they'll even do that). In shutting it down, they'll manipulate the media and the masses into thinking that the Bush lawbreaking has been adequately address and then suggest, in the interest of political harmony, that the country must move on to address the huge problems we face.

The Bush administration BROKE LAWS, but the Obama administration will likely say they were policy differences.

Eavesdropping on Americans with no warrants, torturing detainees, destroying evidence relating to investigations, and interfering in criminal prosecutions for political purposes -- those are crimes -- felonies -- not policy differences. Bush officials engaged in lawbreaking, clearly.

If the Obama administration decides to just "let it go" for "political harmony," our country will continue its deterioration.

Anonymous said...

Parry:

Time to confess you've been a victim of "bait & switch".

You all were so eager to dump Bush that you ran and grabbed Obama - giving him a sloppy wet kiss.

Now look at what you've jumped in bed with.

Enough with the naive left-wing swill, GET TOUGH! EXERCISE CRITICAL THINKING.

ladybroadoak said...

Obama is just another flea on the same old dog.

We must unite as citizens and PROTECT the US Constitution.

Read Afterdowningstreet, to find out what must be done.

OBAMA is just ZBIG in a charismatic overcoat on a great big leash.

B/R said...

Amen, Robert Parry, to your assessment of who the appointees (or candidates for such) should be. But there will be a lot of bruised BIG EGOS as well as deja vu-devastated, ordinary Clintonistas if Hillary is not the one. What a lost opportunity if Obama can't take the heat on this topic and opt for the gritty, the less glitzy thing.

Anonymous said...

When will Parry and other liberal journalists will stop dealing with 9/11 with a Friedman-like attitude? If you have real proofs about who perpetrated the 9/11 attacks, show them. A lot of people will appreciate them. If all you have is the administration's word for it, then just stop supporting that; it takes credibility away from you, an otherwise excellent source of alternative journalism.

Nat Parry said...

I find it amazing that Obama is (reportedly) considering Hillary Clinton for Sec. of State, and I just hope that as his lawyers investigate the Clintons' financial ties to questionable world leaders, that she will be disqualified. I mean, this is not even an issue of "the appearance" of conflicts of interests -- this is an issue of the Clintons' track record of helping those who give them money (Marc Rich, Frank Giustra, et al).

We know that donors to the Clinton Foundation include the Saudi royal family, the king of Morocco, a foundation linked to the United Arab Emirates, and the governments of Kuwait and Qatar .. why in the world would we want to compromise US foreign policy by installing a Sec. of State to such questionable characters?

I don't have any illusions that Obama is perfect, nor that he is above making the sorts of calculated decisions that all politicians do, but I do seriously hope he is not stupid enough to appoint this woman Sec. of State. There are so many better choices...

Anonymous said...

Obama is financed by George Soros:

Soros-Funded Democratic Idea Factory Becomes Obama Policy Font

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aF7fB1PF0NPg&refer=home

fact checker said...

Nov 18, 12:21 AM EST

By LARA JAKES JORDAN
Associated Press Writer

Obama advisers: No charges likely against workers who authorized harsh interrogation methods

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Barack Obama's incoming administration is unlikely to bring criminal charges against government officials who authorized or engaged in harsh interrogations of suspected terrorists during the George W. Bush presidency. Obama, who has criticized the use of torture, is being urged by some constitutional scholars and human rights groups to investigate possible war crimes by the Bush administration.

Two Obama advisers said there's little - if any - chance that the incoming president's Justice Department will go after anyone involved in authorizing or carrying out interrogations that provoked worldwide outrage.

The advisers spoke on condition of anonymity because the plans are still tentative. A spokesman for Obama's transition team did not respond to requests for comment Monday.

etc. blah blah blah

++++++

Change we can believe in? I think not.

disgusted said...

Well, perhaps the media should have checked Obama's ties to questionable characters during the long primary season.

Nat Parry said...

Well, was anyone stopping you from writing about it yourself? Obviously, you have a computer and a modem, do the damn work yourself.

Anonymous said...

Testy, testy.

Most ordinary mortals don't have sources and a list of contacts.

You're not sounding very professional.

Nat Parry said...

I'm just saying -- everyone loves to criticize for the articles that are not written, when in fact the internet is a free and egalitarian forum where anyone can do the research, write their own articles and post them to a blog. But you know what? That requires work, and it seems most people would rather not invest all that time and energy and would rather post complaints anonymously. It's kind of lame...