Skip to comments.Behind the Strategy of Obama's Appointments
Posted on 12/11/2008 8:30:32 AM PST by Nachum
Among Liberals and Conservatives there is a certain amount of bafflement at Obama's cabinet appointments, which are being characterized as center-right.
On the left there are clashing calls of "Give him a chance" and "What the hell is going on here", and some on the right are displaying idiotic glee at Gates remaining on the job and are even prepared to embrace Hillary Clinton, little understanding what any of it means.
They don't get it because they are looking at Obama's appointments from an American political perspective. But Obama is not an American, and his political strategies are not what Americans are used to.
American Presidents appoint cabinet members they agree with to successfully carry out their policies, but Obama will appoint cabinet members he disagrees with as a hedge against failure.
Obama has said repeatedly that he expects long term economic problems, and that he will need two terms to fulfill his promises. Biden has spoken about a major crisis that will strike early in Obama's first term. None of that is a coincidence, because this is not an administration preparing for success, but one that is preparing for failure.
Obama's cabinet is not really a conventional American Presidential cabinet as much as it is a European style"coalition government", front loaded with what passes for "Conservatives" in the Democratic party. (Keep in mind that this is a party that has become so extreme that Hillary Clinton and John Kerry are considered its conservatives.)
Unlike European governments though, Obama's cabinet appointments have a great deal of visibility, but no real political power. Beginning most prominently with Hillary Clinton, Obama has surrounded himself with three of his opponents in the 2008 election. That is unprecedented in American politics, but not so unusual in a coalition government where keeping your enemies close is normal.
That combination of public visibility and political helplessness however makes the likes of Hillary Clinton and Gates dependent on Obama, far more than their European counterparts would be. While they may be the public face of their respective areas of responsibility, the policies will be made behind the scenes by Obama's real backers. The Samantha Power-Hillary Clinton duality in the State Department is typical of the real arrangement. The Cabinet members have been chosen for name recognition, but the real power will be in the hands of the radical left.
And so the policies of the left will be implemented with a "human face". Republicans will find themselves unable to protest what Gates will do, after all wasn't he Bush's Secretary of Defense, will be the reply? Jews will be told to shut up, isn't Hillary Clinton a friend of Israel? And so it will go down the line.
And when setbacks occur, Obama will have his "centrists" to blame and throw under the bus. He won't be "responsible", his coalition government will be. And in an American system he can "dissvolve" the coalition by firing his cabinet members without any need for new elections. This way Obama gets the best of both systems, by exploiting the chinks in American democracy, as he has done all throughout his career.
And when Obama shows his real hand with a new left wing cabinet, there will be no more room for protests. After all didn't his "center - right" cabinet fail? Time to give the radicals a chance to drive the bus, as if they had not been driving the bus all along. Obama will ask for another chance to implement his agenda, this time "uncompromised" by having to work together with the conservatives who failed him and the country. No wonder those in the know around Obama are smirking at the gleeful reaction by conservatives to Obama's cabinet appointments.
Tactics like these are not uncommon in parliamentary systems, and beginning with Soros' "Shadow Party", the game plan has been to skew the Democratic party and American politics far to the left, using the European and Third World political arrangements that Soros and Obama are most comfortable with.
The radical left's tactics commonly involve gaining power by forming limited coalitions with more moderate liberals, only to find a pretext for purging them once in power. Obama has his coalition now and his scapegoats. And the game is beginning.
But the key to understanding what is set to happen, is that the left's rhetoric and its real agenda are not at all the same thing. The radical left may be anti-war in the opposition, but once in office, it is very much pro-war, only the targets of the war change. Under the left, occupations become peacekeeping missions, and domestic police powers become completely justified.
But Conservatives who applaud this change are like pigs who applaud the sausage machine. Bill Clinton vastly extended the power of Federal law enforcement without any domestic crisis to justify it, and helped turn what was left of Yugoslavia into a pipeline for drugs, sex trafficking and Jihad using the US military. The current Democratic congress will pass things that will make the Patriotic Act look Libertarian by comparison, and Obama will target countries like Columbia and Israel who are standing up to the terrorists.
Start looking beneath the surface. The Obama campaign was conducted with a smiley face up front concealing the ugly vicious guts of the real campaign inside. That is a taste of what is coming for the next four years. It was a campaign of smoke and mirrors, a grandiose media spectacle with empty slogans, that amounted to nothing. It was the organized vote fraud and media recruitment that mattered. And that is the lesson for those who want to understand the enemy. What is out front means absolutely nothing. It's the agenda behind the scenes that really matters.
Expect a great many vapid statements over the next four years, events that have no purpose except to put on a show and grandiose sounding names, while the real work will go on in the basement, and the scenery on stage will change in order to keep right on manipulating the public. But nothing is what it seems. This will not be a White House run in any conventional way and that is the real message of Obama's cabinet appointments. Forget the usual conventions of American politics, the rule book has changed. The White House is no longer in American hands, and American politics no longer runs by American rules. While some conservatives reach for the brass ring of bipartisanship, refusing to realize that what they are reaching for does not exist. What exists is a ruthlessly planned takeover of American democracy. Resisting it is our task.
Thought this was a good read.
Well said. Thanks for posting this.
Man, what kind of crack are they smokin'?
Is anyone stupid enough to believe that Obama is the only virgin in the whorehouse? They all crawled out of the same cesspool in Chicago, Illinois the most corrupt state in America, and we are supposed to believe Obama came out smelling like a rose while all the rest stink to high heaven??? Riiiiiight.
“Corruption, Nationalization, Propaganda! That’s what you’re going to get from the Obama administration, but you’ll have a hard time convincing The Messiah’s followers. The press is doing everything they can to protect The Messiah, Barack Obama. Jesus walked on water. Obama apparently walks on a cesspool and is untainted by it. President-elect Obama isn’t corrupt, no, no. He just has corrupt associates from Bill Ayers and Rev. Wright to Gov. Rod Blagojevich. The Drive-By Media marvel at Obama’s lies and evasions on the Blago scandal over selling Obama’s Senate seat. This state is corrupt from Mayor Daley on up. This is where Obama honed his “thug” political instincts.” ~ Rush 12/10/2008
“Steve Doosy [on Fox & Friends] noted that Barack changed the pronoun in his statement.
It went from, “we had no contact with the governor.. to I had no contact with the governor.
When the LA Times asked him if he had contact with the governor he again repeated I have had no contact with the governor. When asked did anyone assigned by you contact him, his reply was, I can not comment on an active investigation.
I am reading Jonah Goldberg’s Liberal Fascism and can see Barry convincing a “majority” of Americans of almost anything, when rhetoric and marketing count for more than principle, and power at any cost is the goal of the ‘rats. We are living in an age of pop culture, and a war against Christianity. Barry is the Answer, no matter what is the question! ~ maica http://www.amazon.com/Liberal-Fascism-American-Mussolini-Politics/dp/0385511841
Not even inaugurated yet, Obamas administration could well be the most corrupt in American history
hillbuzz.wordpress.com ^ | December 10, 2008 | hillbuzz
Somewhere, Ulysses S. Grant is thrilled, Richard M. Nixons chuckling, and Warren G. Harding sighs with relief, because Obama seems destined to give them all a real run for their money to become the most corrupt administration this nation has ever seen (and thats even before we get into doling out billions in infrastructure spending, which will be a Pandorrian Box of potential graft and corruption).
The media deliberately ignored Obamas connections to Tony Rezko (convicted felon), Valerie Jarrett (known in Chicago for her housing fraud and slumlord deals), James Meeks (rabid homophobe), Yesse Yehudah (whom you have probably never heard of, but who gave Obama a $10,000 bribe 8 years ago), Mayor Daley (where do we begin?), Rod Blagojevich (who you are hearing about only now, and whom Obama worked for, alongside Rahm Emanuel, back in 2002), Emil Jones (the absolute worst of what Illinois has to offer), Jeremiah Wright (of whom youve only seen the smallest tip of the teensiest iceberg), Jan Schakowsky (wife of convicted felon Robert Creamer, who taught at Camp Obama), Vera Baker (the mystery woman of Martinique), and whole host of others.
There is honestly enough Chicago political scandal Obama is directly involved in to keep explosive stories in the news, like this weeks Blagojevich-a-palooza, every week for the next 4 years.
The most damaging one is the Yesse Yehudah bribe, which the media continues to ignore, but which seems awfully similar to what Blagojevich is accused of doing.
Remember, the complaint against Blagojevich alleges he told Childrens Memorial Hospital that if they wanted an $8 million state reimbursement, the CEO needed to give Blagojevich a large campaign donation, in the realm of $50,000.
Obama did the same thing 8 years ago, but with Yesse Yehudah and a $75,000 community grant Obama diverted to Yehudah when he was in the state senate. Yehudah is a Republican, so it seemed strange at the time that Obama, a Democrat, would push for a $75,000 grant to Yehudahs personal charity. And then, even more strangely, Yehudah, a Republican [in name only - theres no such thing as a true Republican in Chicago], arranged for 10 $1,000 contributions to be made, all on the same day, to Obamas campaign fund (at the time, Obama was hurting for money, coming off an unsuccessful 1998 bid to take Bobby Rushs seat in Congress). 10 people who had never given to any political campaign before, and who could barely afford to pay their own rent, and were all associated with or employed by Yehudah in some way, all decided to give $1,000 to Obama out of the blue, on the same day. And that same day, surprisingly enough, was the day the grant cleared to Yehudah.
In essence, Yehudah got $65,000 from the state grant for himself, and Obamas fee for arranging this was $10,000 for his own pocket.
And then theres the deal Obama struck with Tony Rezko, which enabled Obama to buy a mansion he could not otherwise afford, because of heavy lifting done on his behalf by magical real estate fairy Rezko. The owner of the mansion would not sell it to Obama because Obama did not have enough money to buy both the mansion and the large lot next to it, and the seller insisted both the house and the adjacent lot had to be sold the same day. So, Obama bought the house and Tony Rezkos wife bought the lot next door, so Obama in essence got a mansion worth twice what he paid for it (since shortly thereafter, Rezkos wife sold enough of her land parcel to Obama to give him enjoyment of the land, and make resale of the land to any other entities undesirable. For all intents and purposes, that whole neighboring parcel also became the Obamas private property).
And what about Michelle Obamas magical salary increase at the University of Chicago Hospital, once her husband found himself in a position to send millions of state dollars to Michelles employer and Michelle demanded, and received, a raise that tripled her salary? The hospital got millions because of Obamas influence and, flush with cash, the hospital thanked the Obamas by tripling Michelles already steep salary.
And this is just the stuff thats widely known in Chicago.
Dont be surprised when you finally hear about all of it, in slow reveals, for the next 4 years.
I recently read the book "Boyd" by Robert Coram. Excellent biography of a fighter pilot who fought the Pentagon to get better jets (A-10, F-16) and who also worked closely with Dick Cheney designing the phenomenal strategy that won the first Gulf War. I highly recommend the book -- Boyd was an amazing guy.
One of his theories was about conflict and how important it is to confuse the enemy and to get inside the enemy's decision cycle was key. Your opponent can collapse internally with very little pressure if you can introduce enough anomalous information so that the enemy no longer knows which end is up or what information is trustworthy.
I see evidence that the Left is actively pursuing this sort of strategy against the US. It can be a very devastating strategy.
That is the gist of this well-written column/essay. Chilling, isn't it. Hyperbole? No. Just blunt and right to the chase.
Bloney. When you're the guy at the top, people blame you.
Thanks for this excellent piece and introducing me to Sultan Knish’s blog.
A good analysis of the Obamanation’s strategy..