About Obama

Obama Twitter icon

Margaret Kimberly at The Smirking Chimp:

Should Black America Want a Black President?

by Margaret Kimberley | May 16 2007 – 12:58pm | permalink

From Black Agenda Report

When Colin Powell considered running for president, the question on everyone’s mind was whether or not he could win. In other words, would white people who said they liked him really vote for him? Powell eventually decided to shoot for a high profile gig with the next Republican administration, and the question remained unanswered.

Unlike Powell, Senator Barack Obama has entered a presidential race. He is the candidate with all the buzz, and he has raised a ton of money. Hillary Clinton thought that being the boss’s wife would be enough to waltz into the nomination. All she had to do was bask in the Clintonian after-glow and presto, instant oval office residency.

Sadly for her, she shares her husband’s politics of meaninglessness but none of his personal charisma. She can’t get away with fence straddling, triangulating, or insulting the party base. Along comes Obama, a living reincarnation of Clintonian political charm straight from the glory days. Now that Hillary has been out Clintoned, she looks less like a sure thing.

Obama has mastered the art of political bullshitology, and proven campaign fund-raising prowess. He does look like a contender. The likelihood of white people voting for him is still open to question, but that may not be the most important question. Black Americans will again support the Democratic nominee, but is Obama more worthy of that loyalty than any other Democrat?

If he is a winner, it will be in large part because he is willing to throw black people under the bus. He proved as much in his overrated speech at the 2004 Democratic national convention. “There is not a Black America and a White America and Latino America and Asian America – there’s the United States of America.” Of course there is a black America, and most of us don’t want to pretend otherwise.

Obama’s 2004 speech does not mention racism, not even to say something bland such as, racism is bad. Obama sells color blindness in a country that is all about the color spectrum. It makes no sense for black America to embrace this obvious canard. Will we purchase a lemon if the seller looks like us?

Read whole thing…

Kimberly goes on to make a convincing case for Obama’s lemonosity.

It’s a dilemma many citizens around the world face: now that we’re able to see and hear, read and minutely dissect for ourselves what those who aspire to lead us do and say, the more they appear lacking. So, faced with such lacklustre aspirant leaders, do we make the best of a bad job and try to mould less-than-ideal candidates to our will once in office, a la Polly Toynbee’s injunction to hold your nose and vote Labour?

The Labour party in the UK and the Republicans in the US both tried that already, and look where it got us. No, let’s hold them to account before the election, let’s have it all upfront. No more pigs in a poke.

Barack Obama has always appeared to me to be right out of central casting for any given West-Wing type drama. He’s the pacific, calm president who goes on tv and reassures the nation. He’s Morgan Freeman.

I’ve yet to see that he gives a real shit about injustice or poverty or anything much except sucking up to the DLC and getting the nomination. On the other hand that’s the realpolitik game all candidates have to play in the current system. At this point we just don’t know. But then I don’t get to choose – it’s not my opinion that’s relevant here. It’s thinkers, commenters and voters, people like Margaret Kimberly. It’s a black thing.

Or is it? Whoever wins the presidency is in control of an economic and political behemoth that distorts the world’s political gravity. So indirectly we in the rest of the world of whatever race or nationality, do have a stake.

For the US to elect a black president would send a clear and deeply symbolic message to the world that America is prepared to change its ways on any number of levels.

But if that black president appears to support or supinely accepts US political corruption, media manipulation, and world economic and military bullying as usual, then his colour will become entirely irrelevant, except as an epithet to throw at him.

Comment of The Day – Several Days Late and Several Dollars Short

Naomi Wolf’s Guardian article “Fascist America, in 10 easy steps” has been riding high at the top of the paper’s most-read list and has been being feverishly linked to and discussed widely on US liberal blogs. Unsurprisingly so, as it ticks all the boxes and provides the perfect predigested narrative for what Bushco has been up to since ‘elected’. Simple, they’ve been putting in place planned fascism.

Wolf is not exactly what you’d call left-wing; rather she’s in the van of the soft liberal Democrat-ism that enabled Bush in the first place. So why the cries of fascism now? She took her time noticing. and is she actually sincere, or is it more Dem triangulation?

Leninology:

If you ask me, it’s part of this ‘Anyone But Bush’ politics that is destroying the American left and drawing the antiwar movement into the frigid Democratic Party graveyard. The politics of MoveOn.org, Howard Dean’s fan club, and such alignments, are to divert mass disaffection with Bush’s wars into the mainstream of the Democratic Party

Commenter Spartan Weakling takes that view further:

Playing the Fascist Card is calling for the disastrous Popular Front against it: working class organisations will HAVE TO “ally” themselves (read: support without question) with all “progressive” political forces, that is, who seek to return to the “previous” state of political status quo, being oh so much better than the current one (now christened “fascism”).

Therefore, the peace movement, the veterans, the families of the soldiers, the workers who pay for the war MUST come under the leadership of the Democrats (that progressive force in US politics), or else… FASCISM!!! And you don’t want to support FASCISM do you? Then shut up and come under the leadership of the radical (lol) bourgeoisie, because FASCISM!, and otherwise FASCISM!, and if you don’t then FASCISM! and anything else (read: the current state of affairs with no substantial change) is so much better than FASCISM! what’s the matter with you people.

So for me, it’s once again the question of the Popular Front vs the United Front, on which Trotsky had rather A LOT to say…

Now I don’t disagree with Wolf that the framework for fascism is in place and ready to roll, when it so patently is. I don’t disagree on the facts; indeed it’s us left-wing bloggers that have made sure those facts came to light. We’ve been warning of creeping US fascism on this blog since we started in 2001, and before, and there’s thousands of others just like us who’ve been doing the same.

The current US political situation didn’t just happen. Extremists need passive collaborators, or at the very least people too self-absorbed to notice anything that does not directly affect them, to do their nefarious work and Wolf was one, part of the charmed circle of the ‘feminist’ political media establishment, the one that trumpets free markets and the corporate state as empowering for all women despite the empirical evidence. She’s as much a Democratic political operative as she is a writer:

Wolf was involved in Bill Clinton’s 1996 re-election bid where she brainstormed with the Clinton-Gore team about ways to reach “soccer moms” and other female voters.

During Al Gore’s unsuccessful bid for the 2000 US presidency, Wolf was hired as a consultant to target female voters, reprising her role in the Clinton campaign. Wolf’s ideas and participation in the Gore campaign generated considerable media coverage and criticism. According to a report by Michael Duffy in Time Magazine, “Wolf [was] paid a salary of $15,000 a month…in exchange for advice on everything from how to win the women’s vote to shirt-and-tie combinations.” This article was the original source of the widely reported claim that Wolf was responsible for Gore’s “three-buttoned, earth-toned look.” The Duffy article did not mention “earth tones.” The Time article and others also claimed that Wolf had developed the idea that Gore is “a beta male who needs to take on the alpha male in the Oval Office”.

In an interview with Melinda Henneberger in the New York Times, Wolf denied ever advising Gore on his wardrobe. Wolf herself claimed she mentioned the term “alpha male” only once in passing and that “[it] was just a truism, something the pundits had been saying for months, that the vice president is in a supportive role and the President is in an initiatory role…I used those terms as shorthand in talking about the difference in their job descriptions.”

It’s all very well Wolf standing up at this too-late stage in a foreign newspaper and saying this, but where was she when it really mattered, when this could have been nipped in the bud? When Alito was up for confirmation, for example? Too busy pushing her career of telling us ordinary women what failures we are compared to her and her privileged sisters, that’s where.

Did it never once occur to Wolf that the reason she made so much money and did so well pushing her personal empowerment agenda through her books is because it suits the long-term propaganda purposes of the very institutions, individuals and organisations she now accuses of enabling fascism?

Oh, how I loathe accommodationist women.

The Enemy Is Us

It seems bloggers and socialists really are percieved as a threat by the powers that be. The UK Ministry of Defence has published a report enumerating future situations it sees as likely threats to the military, and quietly dropped in amongst the dire predictions of anthropogenic climate change, worldwide drought, and a billion refugees on the move was this paragraph:

[…]

The 90-page report comments on widely discussed issues such as the growing economic importance of India and China, the militarisation of space, and even what it calls “declining news quality” with the rise of “internet-enabled, citizen-journalists” and pressure to release stories “at the expense of facts”. It includes other, some frightening, some reassuring, potential developments that are not so often discussed.

[…]

Marxism

“The middle classes could become a revolutionary class, taking the role envisaged for the proletariat by Marx,” says the report. The thesis is based on a growing gap between the middle classes and the super-rich on one hand and an urban under-class threatening social order: “The world’s middle classes might unite, using access to knowledge, resources and skills to shape transnational processes in their own class interest”. Marxism could also be revived, it says, because of global inequality. An increased trend towards moral relativism and pragmatic values will encourage people to seek the “sanctuary provided by more rigid belief systems, including religious orthodoxy and doctrinaire political ideologies, such as popularism and Marxism”.

[My emphasis]

They’re scared of us. Good, they should be.

Attacks on the independence and free speech of bloggers come from several directions and seem diffuse but aren’t. Digby and others have written extensively recently on the paid media’s repeated attempts to impose ‘civility’ on bloggers (they’ll decide what civility is, duh). The latest push is couched as criticism of blogs in general, but it’s clear that it’s left political bloggers that are meant.

Of course it’s ridiculous given the US’ First Amendment that anyone could impose a civility code on US bloggers.and they have even less power over us non-USanian bloggers. And speaking as an avowed Marxist I can say with some confidence that most leftish political blogs are far from Marxist – most are woolly liberal – and they’d be horrified to described as such, the prejudice against socialism in the US being what it is.

But that’s not the point.

The point is to push the meme that left political bloggers are wreckers, communistic vandals and traitorous foul-mouthed criminals that must be controlled or eliminated. It’s a meme that, once launched and spreading virally, produces the handily deniable side-effect oframping up and justifying the right’s inchoate ill-feeling to the point where the ‘public’ (ie a bunch of rightwing nutjobs) decides that Something Must Be Done.

In the UK the latest ammunition being used by the papers agaisnt bloggers and online freedom is concern about schoolchildren harassing teachers online. In the US Kathy Sierra’s horrible experience is being conflated by the right with left bloggers’ contempt for Coulter and Malkin and portrayed as undifferentiated sexism, with the intent of painting left political blogs as little more than vehicles for bigotry. (Project, much?)

It’s a created narrative being put together in Washington and Westminster because it’s in the paid media’s own interests to cut down their rivals (all that child support and alimony to pay and all those expensive habits to support). They’re circling the wagons and using the weapons they’ve got: access to the airwaves and an infinite facility for bending the truth.

This, happily for the Republicans and New Labour, both with so much to lose from the truth coming out, neatly co-incides with long-term strategies for the silencing of polical opposition. Their tools are the tools of government:The Patriot Act, Total Information Awareness, biometric ID cards, fingerprinting children, control orders, ASBOs, domestic spying, the use of the Justice department, FBI and IRS to target political enemies, the attempt by the Bush administration to take over control of the internet’s DNS root servers – all speak of preparations for a crackdown on dissenters of all kinds, and these days the most pesky, effective and visible dissenters are political bloggers.

Criticise the President, pay the price.

The corporate media’s threatened by a medium it knows will eventually make it obsolete. British and American governments’re threatened by millions of citizens who finally have an unconstrained public voice and plan to use it.

There’s a lot at stake – is it any wonder government and corporate media are fighting back in concert to protect their interests? We may not know our own strength yet, but the establishment has an inkling of where this could lead and they’re making preparations for revolt.

“What Did You Do In The Information War, Daddy?”

The notion of free speech may not last very much longer if the US Department of Homeland Security succeeds in its ongoing attempt to steal the whole bloody internet:

DHS Wants Master Key for DNS
Posted by Zonk on Saturday March 31, @01:33PM
from the they-own-all-the-locks-and-doors dept.

An anonymous reader writes

“At an ICANN meeting in Lisbon, the US Department of Homeland Security made it clear that it has requested the master key for the DNS root zone. The key will play an important role in the new DNSSec security extension, because it will make spoofing IP-addresses impossible. By forcing the IANA to hand out a copy of the master key, the US government will be the only institution that is able to spoof IP addresses and be able to break into computers connected to the Internet without much effort. There’s a further complication, of course, because even ‘if the IANA retains the key … the US government still reserves the right to oversee ICANN/IANA. If the keys are then handed over to ICANN/IANA, there would be even less of an incentive [for the U.S.] to give up this role as a monitor. As a result, the DHS’s demands will probably only heat up the debate about US dominance of the control of Internet resources.'”

This is not just about paranoid American security bods trying to control their own national corner of the internet: this is about the blatant theft by Bushco, dressed up in its spiffy Homeland Security costume, of the DNS root servers, the basic infrastructure of the whole world-wide web.

The root DNS servers are essential to the function of the Internet, as so many protocols use DNS, either directly or indirectly. They are potential points of failure for the entire Internet. For this reason, there are 13 named root servers worldwide. There are no more root servers because a single DNS reply can only be 512 bytes long; while it is possible to fit 15 root servers in a datagram of this size, the variable size of DNS packets makes it prudent to only have 13 root servers.

They are housed in multiple sites with high bandwidth access, to try to prevent attacks such as distributed denial-of-service attacks. Most of these single-site installations are still in the United States. Usually each DNS server in a given site is actually a cluster of servers behind a load-balancing set of routers.

However, a number of root servers lie outside the United States:

i.root-servers.net is in Stockholm and many other locations using anycast

k.root-servers.net has globally visible nodes in Amsterdam, London, Miami, Delhi and Tokyo

m.root-servers.net is in Tokyo, Paris and Seoul using anycast

The modern trend is to use anycast to give resilience and to balance load across a wide geographic area. For example, j.root-servers.net, f.root-servers.net and k.root-servers.net are served using anycast from a number of sites worldwide. The use of anycast
has allowed the growth of non-U.S. root DNS servers until most DNS root instances are outside the U.S.

Details of all the root servers can be seen at the root-servers.org website.

[My emphasis]

This isn’t just about market dominance. This is about invasion, colonialism and the pursuit of imperialist aims by other means. The theatre of war just happens to be virtual. The US government, or any other individual governmment for that matter, has no right to claim control over resources it does not own and which are not located on its territory. But it’s doing it anyway… eminent domain apparently works online too.

But where is the chorus of protest from the geeks?

From what I can see the majority of American IT professionals, with notable exceptions, have been remarkably quiet so far on political matters except for their ad infinitum online arguments about some spurious utopian future with libertarian transhumanisam, polyamory and rocky road ice-cream for all. The doors of their comfy padded cages are slamming shut and they don’t hear a thing. Their freedom (and ours) is being stolen from under their noses.

But hey, look, shiny new gadgets! Oooh, iPhone!

Geeky types like to think of themselves as rebels, outside the mainstream and cleverer than the rest of us lesser mortals. So why are they being so bloody supine while Bushco steals the web?

I have a question for any IT professionals reading this: dammit, people, you are the ones that control and support the IT infrastructure, you could stop this if you wanted to. You could put the skids under the entire Bushco venture if you had a mind.

But do you actually want to ? Homeland Security pays well…

So this is my question – do you really give a damn about freedom or are you just happy to be the future well-paid technocrats of the New Fascism? C’mon geeks, get up off your asses and fight for once, us non-geeks are relying on you.

I’ve Got A Little List…

This riposte to Joe Klein by Mickey Z came via JayVinVT in comments over at Wis(s)e Words (see, I put the brackets in) :

Top Ten Reasons Why the White Supremacist Capitalist Patriarchal Culture (WSCPC) …
…Will Not be Toppled Any Time Soon

1. The “average American” (AvAm) believes in the two-party/land of opportunity/god’s country scam

2. The AvAm is too busy “just getting by” to worry about the WSCPC

3. Not tonight, “American Idol” is on

4. Now is not the time; we’ve got evil-doers to kill, goddammit

5. What passes for dissent usually involves asking permission to hold a sign
in a predetermined “free speech zone” for a few hours on a Saturday afternoon

6. To seriously challenge the WSCPC is to invite potential imprisonment and/or physical threat

7. The AvAm would gleefully turn in anyone willing to take such drastic measures to provoke change

8. Decades of intense conditioning have made the WSCPC virtually invisible to the AvAm

9. Uh…what was I saying?

10. Never mind…

And before I forget, Happy 5th birthday to Martin and Wi(s)se Words (see, I remembered twice even!), beginning the sixth consecutive unbroken year of blogging, which is longer than most and longer than the Iraq war. . I started not long after him but at Take It As Red, which I’ve put on hiatus since the advent of our life and blog-mateship in 2003.

All these self-proclaimed blogging Kool Kidz? Hah. They’re just babies man, they’re just babies…