25 May 2009

Preventing Obama

A.D. Freudenheim, The Editor

If I was in the message management business (and I am), and I had a client with terrible, horrible news to release to the world or a potentially disastrous idea to float, well heck: the days before a long, holiday weekend might be perfect. Few people are paying attention to the news as it is; even fewer when focused on sunny weather and beach blanket bingo in the days ahead.

However, I do not know whether I would be clever enough (or Machiavellian enough) to coordinate the release of this terrible, horrible news with a speech timed as a counter-point to a speech given by one of my client's biggest critics. Seriously, it's hard to get one’s critics to cooperate! It takes tremendous resources and planning, and a stealthy streak worthy of a come-from-behind presidential candidate.

Therefore, it should be no surprise to anyone reading this that the person who released the terrible, horrible news was President Barack Obama, and the clever (or Machiavellian) maneuver was to share the information alongside a critical speech given by former Vice President Dick Cheney.

And the news that was released?

That President Obama favors a program of "preventive detention," sort of like what repressive, authoritarian, mock-democratic regimes (c.f., China, Egypt, Iran) use to reign in people and perspectives they don't like. Rather than worry about having to try suspects after they have committed a crime, Obama’s proposal would allow for indefinite detention without a trial where evidence is presented that suggests someone was planning a crime. The New York Times ran two articles about this, the first on 21 May (“Obama Is Said to Consider Preventive Detention Plan”), the second on 23 May (“President’s Detention Plan Tests American Legal Tradition”). There are plenty of others, too.

Thankfully, I am not alone when I say—loudly and unambiguously—this is bullshit. I will dispense with reciting chapter and verse on why such a “preventive detention” plan is unconstitutional. Senator Russ Feingold has done this eloquently enough for anyone interested, while underscoring that Congress (or at least one Senator) is watching and intends to stand guard on this issue. Senator Feingold: thank you!

What I will say is: this entire episode represents a huge political and philosophical disappointment. First, the point/counter-point construct of the speeches was both an obvious and unnecessary distraction. As president, Obama has his choice of speaking moments; he can only have agreed to this because he believed that the media’s (and public’s) focus on the “Thrilla Near the Hilla” (as Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank dubbed it) would distract from the substance of the issues and his articulation of an unsatisfactory policy plan. Otherwise, he would have given his policy address when he knew (as with many others) that it, and he, would be the sole focus of attention.

Second, it is disappointing because a politician as smart as Obama, in an environment as politically charged as this one, should know that it is hard to embrace the ideas of one’s opponent without losing credibility—unless you do so (as Bill Clinton did with policy issues like welfare reform and debt reduction) by embracing the political substance, the underlying logic, and even the fallout. President Obama has not done that; he has not suddenly started talking like Dick Cheney and George W. Bush. Indeed, quite the opposite.

Which leads to the third disappointment: the lingering suspicion that President Obama wants to have it both ways. He seems to want to be respected for charting a course that is not that of the Bush/Cheney years—e.g., one that places diplomacy, not force, at the center of our global leadership—while at the same time being given permission to pursue the same nasty, off-the-books habits, tactics, and policies, but in a manner that is more effectively off-book.

The world is a nasty place, and President Obama’s original, campaign-era formulation that faux-righteous might will not protect us remains as true now as it was then. Hidden righteousness, in the form of “preventive detention,” is unlikely to protect us, either. It only degrades our democracy, our society, and the quality of both our government and our moral judgment. On this issue, President Obama should be stopped.

UPDATE: In his 31 May column for the New York Times, Frank Rich dissects Dick Cheney's speech and the way it was reported in the news - and, very helpfully, points to an article by Jonathan S. Landay and Warren P. Strobel, writing for McClatchy, that points out 10 "inconvenient truths" that Cheney overlooked. That article is worth reading.

Labels: , , , , ,

1 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting writing. Must say I agree on many points especially the "devotion" tothe holcaust. Being a first generation 50 years old Irish American shall I devote to the English creulty during the Potato Famine?
I have many Jewish friends and family though I am blind to peoples ethnicity or religion..until
I moved away frfom my metropolis to a west coast smallish city and opened a very successful business in what I found out to be a very Jewish run local government and esp. business 'community'. I was harassed, yes pointedly by a small and fierce group of Jewish people who had businesses in this city. It was relentless and they wanted me to know what religion they were. Threatened myself and my partner in the store that we had better 'Go Kosher'.When we politely declined the man grabbed his TORAH and stood against the office window shouting from it until we lied and said 'The Police will be here momentarily." 4 years of disruptive loud visits, hate calls , hate emails and hateful raged filled reviews. I waited , chose a date and closed and left town much to the shock of a large following. I moved back to my hometown metropolis.
Here is a word my friends and family never heard from me 'FEAR'.
I have hundreds of people still contacting me asking me when I will open in my Metropolis. I fear so much the emotional damage of these rage filled business disrupting visits happening again.
I have even looked up owners of similar businesses to see how many were Jewish owned. This may sound odd but I am may go to a hypnotist so I can get over this pain memory and move on with my life career.
IT WAS THAT BAD.
I am still blind to peoples ethnicity and religion in my everyday life but still unable to shake the damage they did to my psyche. NEVER in my life did I expect such hatred directed at me or my non violent business. My partners , a waiting public and family are hoping I open a business soon.
This experience actually made me strive for even more peace, respect and serenity for the world in my heart.

2:48 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home