SIGN UP - IT'S FREE!
SEARCH FSM
| National Debt Clock |
A million seconds pass in 12 days.
A billion seconds pass in 31 years.
A trillion seconds pass in 31,688 years!
May 17, 2009
The Escher President: Series 3: The Reversal of Fortune Lithograph
As described in the two previous Escher President series, to a non-Obama-entranced observer, the president’s actions seem to switch between two perspectives: a white view and a black view. President Obama’s challenge to the release of photos allegedly depicting improper acts by U.S. armed forces in its “War on Terror” becomes interesting subject matter.
From the white view, the administration is merely suggesting it is acting responsibly by fighting to protect against unnecessary provocation of the Muslim world. And, given that Obama has made clear his interest in fully airing to the world our supposed “dirty laundry” as part of his effort to apologize globally, this act looks almost selfless. Obama, that is, casts himself as mature enough to reverse positions when he realizes his errant ways and to put the nation’s interests ahead of his personal ones. It is unfortunate that Obama did not reach this conclusion sooner but it is not uncommon for administrations, particularly one dealing with so many troublesome issues, to err and take positions early which later require reversal. Sure, Obama is naïve and inexperienced but he is learning on the job and, after all, the outcome is the correct one – no reason to needlessly inflame the Muslim world when we are extending hands (and lips) to improve our “image.”
The black view (again, having nothing to do with race) sees this explanation as spin which evidences precisely how cynical Obama’s true agenda is. A few premises: Obama is not, and has never been, a competent executive. Nor does Obama have any interest in doing what is necessary to truly be an effective executive. Instead, Obama has shown that his stock is pure politics. Whether he is perceived as chief narcissist gone wild or boy wonder political manipulator, Obama has demonstrated that his interests lie primarily in securing public adulation and, now more importantly, holding onto it.
Securing power lies at the base of most every policy Obama holds. Whether it is to embed himself within the control of various critical industries, repay unions for support, or drive the nation into extreme debt levels leaving us permanently “too big to fail,” Obama’s approach (á la his guru Saul Alinsky) is to transfer power from the Haves to the HaveNots. Making a majority of the nation receive from, if not become dependent upon, the government is the simplest route to securing future votes. Funding with federal dollars organizations such as ACORN and moving the Census to White House control are just further extensions of this policy in action.
Perhaps the clearest example is the upcoming immigration legislation likely to be presented. Amnesty to untold millions of illegal immigrants is the golden challis for those seeking to enlarge their voter bases today. Both George W. Bush and John McCain adjusted their policies for this promise and Obama is preparing to literally drive it out of the park.
Nonetheless, Obama’s true weakness in executive pretensions lies with national security. Without debating the senselessness that underscores both his foreign policy instincts and reversals of Bush policies to date, it is clear that, should America be attacked under Obama’s watch, the contrast with Bush could be politically devastating. Obama would have little to hide behind.
Hence, the maneuverings that underlie many of his initial foreign policy plans seek to displace possible future responsibility elsewhere. This could be seen recently in Obama’s demand that U.S. actions to forestall Iran’s nuclear advances be conditioned upon Israel’s compliance with U.S. plans for settlement of the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Knowing full well that Iran is dead set on becoming a nuclear weapons nation, that our presumed “allies” all have interests with Iran too important to sacrifice to supporting the U.S. in truly tough action, and that not even his own charm and “magic” will change that, Obama must prepare for his inevitable failure. If Obama forces a Middle East peace, even if it is fatal to Israeli interests, he will sell it as worth the loss of Iran to nuclear weapons status, should that occur. If peace is not obtained and Iran succeeds, then do what the Muslim world has done for centuries – blame the Jews.
In setting up this gambit, Obama is doing nothing different than Yasser Arafat did for years. As described by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as “the reversal of causality,” Arafat constantly reframed any action Israel took in response to Palestinian terror as the cause of the next terror act. Why blow up the restaurant? The border crossings are unbearable. Obama will substitute Israel’s possible obstinacy for Obama’s complete lack of will and skill in confronting our true danger – Iran’s nuclear ambitions. And the black view will suggest that Obama has, to begin with, no real interest in peace for Israel anyway.
And the same is the case with the reversal of the release of photos. What America does (rightly or wrongly) to combat terror becomes the cause of terror. Obama knows, and seemingly has convinced his popular media, that he needs to keep the “Bush-Cheney” demon out front and center as his best excuse for any future attacks. Not only has Bush been gone for months but the torture issue relates to events years prior. Nonetheless, the Obama-entranced media insists on keeping the Bush demonization alive for as long as he needs it. The Pelosi-Conyers-Levin et al push for public hearings furthers this political agenda as well. Obama the campaigner used Bush to create a masterpiece of a campaign. Obama the president turns out to be nothing more than Obama the campaigner.
To recap, Obama must keep alive the notion that “Bush-Cheney” is responsible for supposed “Muslim rage” so that he will have an excuse for any future terror attack against the U.S. He is essentially purchasing an option on the future reversal of causality.
By insisting in the first instance upon releasing the photos, Obama has clearly communicated he finds it necessary for the nation to find a pathway to forgiveness.
He initially suggested to the world the photos are horrific. By now objecting to their release, he accomplishes two critical objectives. First, despite his subsequent disclaimer that the photos were not as “sensational” as those of Abu Ghraib, he makes the world wonder how bad those images are such that many may fantasize much worse than reality. Images made in one’s mind are often far more consequential and difficult to remove.
Secondly, Obama continues the litigation so that the issue remains unresolved and, thus, available to be paraded every evening in front of the world. As Andrew McCarthy has brilliantly described , Obama could end the litigation by issuing an executive order. His failure to do so evidences his disingenuousness. Because the litigation is likely to fail, he will be able to have the photos disclosed without being held politically accountable. Both are steps toward securing “Bush-Cheney” as the inevitable blameworthy parties should we be hit again.
As always, the black view reaches a point where the observer begins to question whether it is too extreme or, in this case, cynical. A quick switch back to the white view is pressed in order to allow the observer to temporarily absolve Obama of evil intentions: perhaps Obama was just demonstrating his lack of any executive skill in failing to have thought through the consequences before he expressed his desire to release the photos. As the black view repeatedly emerges and retreats, however, it continually reminds us that Obama’s campaign skills, however, completely out rank his executive competence. The release of these photos brings about the Escher-like experience where the observer ultimately questions whether Obama’s reversal of position to create a reversal of causality will result in a reversal of all of our fortunes.
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Bill Siegel lives in New York.
Reader Comments: Submit Your Comment (0) | Sign Up for FSM Updates!
