He's the President, Stupid

Al Qaeda deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri called Barack Obama a house Negro in a tape that surfaced this week. Before that, everyone's favorite spoiler Ralph Nader called Obama an Uncle Tom. The question these zingers beg is similar to the one a lot of progressives want to ask: Is Obama a Clinton Democrat in Progressive clothing--the blather about change nothing more than that old sizzle but no steak routine? Marketing 101?

Given my checkered past as an anti-war activist/publisher and the work I did with the Unabomber, I guess it follows that the parade of Clintonista's into Obama's White House would bug me.

The reason is simple: I allowed myself to believe that Obama was more liberal than he actually is.

When I was in college I often drove from Vermont to Connecticut on weekends to visit my ailing step-father. He was a Republican. I was not. The cassette I listened to in my silver Honda Prelude was a compilation of Malcolm X speeches, which I knew by heart. To me those speeches were better than punk rock.

I blanched the other day when Ayman al-Zawahiri was framing a critique of Barack Obama with the aid of Malcolm X's infamous distinction between the house Negro and the field Negro because Zawahiri's critique was potentially similar to mine. I want folks to see we have a fairly mainstream--seemingly competent--president-elect. Zawahiri wanted Muslims worldwide to know that Obama was Muslim in name alone. His message: do not be fooled. America is a menace, and Obama is a danger.

Thank God Zawahiri is right about the world, at least the version he inhabits. I think I'm right as well.

Post-80s candor is the hobgoblin here. Privileged language is a rainbow of ghettoized categories that smooths all the jagged edges of social discourse by over-determining who can say what. A person like Ralph Nader, among a certain set in society, would be applauded for calling the half African American president-elect an Uncle Tom to corporate America. People like Bill Ayers would have tilted at the supposed liberalism of Obama. I used to be one of the people applauding back when I was an elitist ideologue.

Are the accusations true? From the point of view of al Qaeda's number two man? Indeed. From the point of view of many radical Americans? Sure. From the point of view of many Democrats? Fewer would say so. And why? Because Obama is an enlightened Clintonian Democrat.

Obama seems to truly believe in a better tomorrow, one that is in direct opposition to our nation's recent past of exploitative social hierarchy and rotten business ethics. He seems to be forward looking. He seems to have a heart. And he has articulated a vision for that better tomorrow. In addition to these estimable characteristics, he also seems to have a great head on his shoulders and a strong desire to succeed that is expressed in measurable accomplishment.

Can you succeed by blowing things up? Look how far that got Osama bin Laden, Ted Kaczynski, and Bill Ayers. Look how far it got George W Bush. It gets you nowhere. Peace activists this week have made a little noise about Obama's hawkish stance on Afghanistan and Pakistan. Obama is not a dove, but he is smart and sane. And smart, sane people don't hurl bombs.

The Clinton people clamoring on board Obama's peace train signify one thing: a bad frame. It's no peace train. It's a government train. It's on tracks that have led to the same place since Eisenhower first told America to beware the military-industrial complex. Why? Because whether your gig is capturing oil tankers off the coast of Somalia or taking over countries, that's where the money is. Obama didn't invent this dynamic, but you don't get to be president if you're no good at playing the game.

A centrist government in this day and age is precisely what this country doesn't need. It's time for change. This is our moment. Or was that just good marketing? It makes me feel better to think it was a little bit of both.

Follow Beau Friedlander on Twitter: www.twitter.com/BeauFriedlander

Comments

[ElliotJar]

Nader never called Obama an Uncle Tom.
Misleading statement and yes; BIG difference.
Let's never mind the fact that most Americans aren't really clear as to if "Uncle Tom" is a
character in a book or not either? However irresponsible this "journalism" is...I'm not
shocked in the slightest. I'm also not surprised to see terrorists and Bush given more
airtime than Nader...wh­ich in my logical mind equates to = respect/"Stockholm syndrome".

Republicrats are cowardly & predictable.
Nader has consistently been the conscience that they fight to ignore.
If people heard Naders grievances they would agree with him. But to fight along side him
would be too much gritty work. Naders fight for change is unfortunately met with REAL and
not abstract & invisible obstacles. So rather than hear him out, and realize the difficult
challenges we face you demonize Nader.

The changes Nader fights for...whic­h are immediately more important that the vague and
abstract issues the "weekend liberal" democrats support...­take courage and action. Two
things that the republicrats would prefer to skip past. Obama serves as their magic bullet.

He by many supporters own confessions is at best to "signify" our change to the world.
A new logo for the brand is enough. Ignore the deeper implications of supporting virtually
more of the same repackaged.

[corkonian]

'Change' means the narrow terms 'left' and 'right ' may not stricly apply anymore. The Clinton era was a decade ago. The people chosen by Obama from that period are smart and their own theories for governing have probably evolved. I think that they're eagerly awaiting being part of the new Obama governing dynamic. I'm not worried yet - Obama seems to possess an extraordinary ability to motivate others, to make sure that his 'vision for that better tomorrow' comes to pass.

[Unsui]

Beau makes some very good points in this post that need to be taken to heart by progressives and lefties (I probably fall into one, or both, of these categories). Obama has proved himself to be a ruthless politician when necessary: this is evident in how he achieved his State Senate seat against his former mentor in Illinois. I believe this to be a good thing. He is a politician, not a saint. He is not, thank goodness, tilting windmills. He is, instead, a pragmatic and realistic PLAYER!
Also, and most importantly for those of us on the left, he is a good guy. As Beau writes, "He seems to have a heart. And he has articulated a vision for that better tomorrow. In addition to these estimable characteristics, he also seems to have a great head on his shoulders and a strong desire to succeed that is expressed in measurable accomplishment". Obama's record attests to this and he has shown an unfailing moral compass in how he has conducted his life, this is something Bill Clinton lacked.
Nobody is going to agree with every position, every cabinet post selection or very tactic he takes, but I think we can trust him to try to build a better more just America.

[biabouman41]

"And smart, sane people don't hurl bombs" I want you to tell me if you had the power and you were told that Bin Laden has been located in a particular site in the rugged mountains of Pakistan, WHAT WILL YOU DO? This stuff is not dogma anymore but reality. Will you use a loudspeaker and ask him to come out with his hands up; ask his friends the Pakistanis to hold him till you get your guys there; have him promise not to be bad again???

[Beau Friedlander - Huffpost Blogger]

I would send in a group of highly trained professional soldiers to capture him so he could be tried for his crimes in an international court. How about you?

[peterg76]

It gets confusing because no matter how liberal, progressive, conservative, authoritarian, whatever, Obama is, it will still be better than another four years of Bush/McCain.

[wonder6789]

Obama's choice of Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State would be for me clear proof that he is not the progressive agent of change we had hoped.

I want to still believe that he is.

[Pyrum]

Hang it up. He isn't. Anyone who believed he is, is a sucker.

[allonfla]

Not suckers, just deaf. Suckers implies that Obama said he was a Progressive candidate, he didn't. He never labeled himself, you guys did.

[biabouman41]

Calm down people, he has not DONE anything yet. I am sure Hilary Clinton will be executing Obama's foreign policy. Have you considered that she opposed his positions in the primary just to position herself, not because she believed what she was saying? I think Obama recognizes that the US is in great danger economically and he wants to have people who have some experience in these variety of posts so things can move right away and without too many bumps. Also, he wants to focus on domestic issues so he has got to get a quality team to execute HIS foreign policies

[wormfarmer]

Mr. Friedlander, there was no rhetoric regarding Ralph Nader and the question of being an "Uncle Sam for the people", or an uncle Tom for the corporations. It was a legitimate question that awaits an answer.
Only time will tell. Thank You for the clarification.

[RBroadfoot]

I have always been a little bugged by this perception that President-elect Obama is a liberal. As a gay man with liberal leanings, I was looking very closely at what he said on litmus test issues for me, particularly after getting screwed over by the retreat on gays in the military and DOMA. Obama was not exactly towing a liberal line.

The main reason I came to support him was NOT because I thought he would faithfully execute a socially liberal agenda, but because he clearly demonstrated that he understands the issues and also understands that the only way to make progress is to find common ground and work with it. It appears that he is sticking with a short list of very important things, and I think that kind of focus will get more done. The fact is, 50% of america is not on board with a lot of the things I think are important, and we need them to get that short list done. As long as we are not losing ground, I am happy to put my full support behind him, and work on bringing folks around to my point of view on social issues outside the political arena.

[DcLarson]

"Before that, everyone's favorite spoiler Ralph Nader called Obama an Uncle Tom."

That is a lie. Nader told an election night TV interviewer that Obama had a "choice" between being "an Uncle Sam for the American people. or an Uncle Tom for the corporatio­ns..."

Say what you will about the word choice, but at no time did Nader "call" Obama anything. Lying about news for partisan advantage is wrong when the Fox News Channel does it. And, it is equally wrong when a Huffington Post columnist does it.

[Beau Friedlander - Huffpost Blogger]

I misremembered the quote. A friend emailed me to take issue with putting Zawahiri's comment anywhere near a discussion about Obama. Nader's word choice trundled a bit beyond unfortunate for today's political environment. Back when he was a consumer advocate, he would've gotten away with it. But you're right, Nader did say Obama had a choice, and I neglected to say that. My impression was that the Uncle Sam part was mere rhetoric. The rest of that interview was clear: Nader suspected Obama of the latter choice.

[chrisincalif]

"....but you don't get to be president if you're no good at playing the game."

How, then, do you explain George W. Bush? :)

[Beau Friedlander - Huffpost Blogger]

W was an extension of folks who were good at playing the game. A likeable proxy, no?

[knosiswar]

a puppet, a cheerleader with a long wall street banking pedigree

[radicalcentrist44]

My guess is that President Obama will not cut defense spending. He knows that he will recieve too much backlash. I wonder how his liberal supporters will deal with that.

[fpie]

Obama is a black man who got himself elected president of one of the most racist countries in the world. He's a miracle worker. He seems to have an ability to get people to do what he wants: opponents self destruct, campaign staff keep mum, die hard racists vote for him. Maybe he can get his chosen staff to work for america.
I didn't believe he could get elected. I swore the Democratic Party was throwing it away running a black man. Much to my delight I was proven wrong about that. More than that, the more I've seen and heard the man the more impressed I am.
If he can run the executive half as well as he ran his campaign he will do great things. Let's give the man a chace to get into office before we call him a disapointment.
p.s. I keep hearing stories of a thaw in race relations. Seems maybe black americans might be willing to forgive white americans so maybe we can all just be americans. If this is a lasting trend and that's all we get out of this election it will be the best bargain america has ever had.

[exoevolution]

CHANGE means CHANGE.

This is a time that screams for CHANGE!

Thanks George!

"For life goes not backward nor tarries with yesterday" - Kahlil Gibran

Onward to the future & a world of blessed CHANGE.

[Sumocat]

What's wrong with being centrist? According to neocons, the U.S. is a center-right nation. That means, according to them, a shift to the center is a shift to the left and a repudiation of the hard right. A shift away from neocon ideology is change I can believe in.

[tigerlille]

I think that my expectations of Obama-as-president have been fairly balanced. But I truly expected just a little more than a return to business-as-usual as it existed before the current Bush was put in office. I think that a lot of people did. That's why we didn't vote for Hilary Clinton. I continue to hope, but the hope is dimming a bit.