May 05, 2009
But Will the Public?

Jim Kunstler leads us to this from Of Two Minds, and let’s hope that Charles Hugh Smith is right. Read his whole argument here.

If you set out to completely discredit the bankers and eviscerate their political power, you’d proceed exactly as Obama has done, enabling it to reach its reductio ad absurdum conclusion of fat bonuses and tax-funded bailouts in the trillions of dollars, at which point the public will rise up in fury, doing the work which was impossible for you, a new “liberal” president…

What better way to trigger “change” that even the banking Aristocracy are powerless to stop than to give them everything they want: no restrictions on stupendous bonuses, no punishment or prosecution, no mark-to-market rules with actual bite, no limits on accounting legerdemain, and on and on and on?…

And what will be the result? A complete repudiation of the entire Bush/Treasury/banker bailout and “free pass” to further plundering. And when the public rises up in righteous fury, then you appear to bend, almost reluctantly, to “the public will.”


machiavelli.jpg

Webding3.jpg

Posted by Jerome Doolittle at May 05, 2009 08:20 AM
Email this entry to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):


Comments

Barack Obama understands that he has no power apart from the political support that exists for him and his policies. He acts generally in such a way as to ensure that he has political support for what he does, and when there is too much entrenched opposition and not enough support to push forward, he does not waste his effort in a direct way but uses a sort of political judo against his opponents to help them turn the public against themselves.

Posted by: Mahakal on May 5, 2009 11:39 AM

He does not waste his effort in a direct way; his idea of political judo is to fool the true believers (which, realistically, requires no effort on his part) while he refuses to lead. That's too scary to the people with money, who got him where he is.

Barack Obama will do a total of nothing for us.

It's still possible we can force his hand, but Believing in Him is the opposite of the right approach.

Posted by: Chuck Dupree on May 5, 2009 11:55 PM

Oh, and re: my man Niccolo, I offer this quote: "…where there is religion it is easy to teach men to use arms, but where there are arms but no religion, it is with difficulty that it can be introduced." Yeah, no duh.

Posted by: Chuck Dupree on May 6, 2009 12:04 AM

As usual, Froomkin provides some sanity.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/white-house-watch/obamas-sporadic-populism.html

Posted by: Chuck Dupree on May 6, 2009 12:46 AM

Chuck, I think you are too cynical. In any case you voted for Barack Obama, right?

"Believing in Him" is beside the point, and is right wing framing as well. He's just a man, albeit intelligent and capable, who we hired for a difficult job. It isn't possible for him to exercise more power than he has.

Imagining that we who force him to act are fooled that it is he who is in control is a confusion. We put him in office, he is our employee.

That doesn't mean he is perfect, but find us a better employee if you think there is a better choice.

Posted by: Mahakal on May 6, 2009 2:33 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?