Is there even a remote possibility that President Obama had planned ahead for an extraordinary coup against the Right wing in the US?
The reasoning is not easy, but may have been along the lines of:
No matter how the first four years are played, the moves will bring forth vitriolic disapproval not only of any Democrat president, particularly, a black president, but that the opposition will make their reactions seem populist, pro-American, and under God's will.
No president could withstand such a tactical offence, especially if it was backed by powerful right wing forces of corporate America. The result would be a one term Presidency, unless he foresaw a way to use the situation to his advantage.
With the numbers in Congress in the President’s favour in his first year of office, the usual manoeuvre would be to charge ahead towards achieving his stated goals of change in the US political arena.
The first four years of a Presidency are effectively cut to three years because re-election campaigning starts in the fourth year, and if the balance of power in the Congress switches to the opposing Republican forces at the mid-terms, then at most only two years of effective power are available to the President.
In those circumstances, one or at best, two years, would effect only a little more than tinkering at the edges of preparation for the promised and needed changes. Executive orders could be invoked, but they would be easily altered, withdrawn, or left to lapse, by a future elected conservative administration.
Could he have foreseen this?
Is there a possibility that the President reasoned that it would be better to sacrifice “The Queen” of majority numbers in the first term tournament of the congressional chess game for a more substantial win in a second term? Then perhaps Obama's seeming weakness, seemingly naïve timidity, in seeking bipartisan agreement on economic policy by appeasing corporate America with tax rewards, altering the health system for the benefit of the insurers, rather than for the insured, and amidst other minor middle of the road policies, could all be viewed as a tangible ploy to attain a second presidential term. The conservative extremist right wing would then be lured into publicly revealing their abject patriotism, their incompetence to serve the nation, and their contempt for compassionately tending to the common good.
Then, just to be certain that the ire of the irrational right extremists is drawn out, along with the fear of the undereducated conservatives, Don't Ask, Don't Tell, could be overturned in a flurry of support for LGBT issues on the claim of human rights, made during and since the Congress Lame Duck session.
Should the LGBTQ community feel used by this tactic? Probably, but not abused to the point of abandoning their only known genuine political allies. It might have been desired for things to move faster, but if the wait meant permanent, unchallengeable recognition of LGBTQ rights of equality, then it would be worth much more than a momentary freedom, easily removed by a following delusory conservative administration; or much worse, by the resurrection of homosexuality as a crime, death penalty included, encouraged by the same US Christian extremists who are such a corrupting influence on Uganda's human rights.
These bad bishops are the deviant players who have what might readily be regarded as a Godless attitude towards not just the LGBTQ community, but towards any person who is politically and culturally progressive.
The rise of the Tea Party pawns might not have been predictable, but if they continue to misconstrue the strain they place on the US Constitution and its ideals for the unity of the nation, then their fall certainly is foreseeable. Also predictable is that their theocratic objectives threaten the democratic safeguards in place in the Constitution.
The danger here is that the President's play, if indeed it is a deliberate ploy, backfires, and a regressive pawn like Bachmann or Palin gets elected queen for what we all will wish was only for a day.
The reason that this waiting game, which ordinarily might be considered an impossible move, an unbelievably risky venture, a far-fetched contrivance, is even a possibility is that when a President wins a second term he will have four clear years to enact or influence policy. For President Obama that would hopefully mean, a willing Democrat Congressional majority to legislate change that will benefit the intent of the Constitution, for the people, the free world, and human rights. This would enable an across the board improvement that would not easily be reversed by a future heedless extremist right wing administration into a contemptible dark age of ignorance and needless suffering.
If the President is playing such a dangerous multi-dimensional strategy, nearly every humanitarian gain made since the Declaration of Independence is at risk of being lost, but if he is not playing such a game, then is not all still in danger of being lost? You'll know if either happens when you are called upon to vote on the adjournment of all but the second Amendment. That is, assuming you are even notified of such a vote. We may be in need of a knight, a Paul Revere to let us know if the Tea Party is coming, or going, just as soon as its members have hounded out how they want to yet again alter history, in the hope of outfoxing their detractors.
When all is considered rationally, or as rational as is presently possible given the disdain with which facts are regarded, it is probably just wishful thinking that any progressive person elected to the Presidency would dare initiate such an intricate and intriguing play to gain change for all the right reasons; even if the opposing right wing extremists seem to do it for the wrong aims, all the time.
However, if President Obama does succeed in castling his position to gain a second term in the White House, we might expect to see realised some of the changes the people thought they would get, as if the above plot is real...or not.
For the people, spectators all, the only winning move is also a waiting game unless they demand an end to corruption. It could be a long wait between moves.
Political chess can be very perplexing, especially when the only people who get checkmated are the electors.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment