10 Reasons Not To Drink the Hope Kool Aid

After eight years of the worst President ever, Americans are correctly excited about the changes coming to Washington. Finally, after eight years of the worst kind of frat boy back slapping, anti-intellectual jihad, and shady back room deals, America has a President who seems capable of forming intelligible sentences and gives at least lip service to the idea of transparency in government.

I think that Americans are also rightfully proud of having elected a Black President. Race was a near non-issue in the general election. America did not elect an "affirmative action candidate." Quite the contrary, they rejected a candidate who enjoyed the type of affirmative action reserved for the sons and grandsons of Admirals. Exit polling consistently showed that Barack Obama even enjoyed an edge among those with negative opinions of Black Americans. So America, while not fully moving beyond the legacy of slavery and segregation can feel free to give itself a big old pat on the back for electing a Black man to the Presidency with very little muss and fuss. And that is certainly a much better thing even than replacing Mr. Bush and the Keystone Kriminals that accompanied him to the White House.

But I've become increasingly alarmed by the words and attitudes of many of my friends, particularly those who consider themselves progressives. I've started calling it the Hope Kool Aid. Simply put, there is so much jubilation over the election of a Democrat who at least pays lip service to the notion of progressive political values, that any legitimate critiques of Mr. Obama and his nascent administration are deemed irrelevant or nit-picking. There are very legitimate reasons to criticise President-Elect Obama. Here are just ten reasons to not believe the hope.

10 Reasons Not To Drink the Hope Kool Aid

• Civilian National Security Force

"We cannot continue to rely on our military to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded."

No one really seems to know what Big O means by this, but it seems to be distinct from his universal, mandatory public service for college credit. The words "national security force" send chills down my spine by themselves, but the modifier "civilian", particularly when coupled with the notion that it would be "just as strong, just as well funded" as our military smacks of the German Stasi. While the language used is vague (what else is new?), the notion that America needs more cops is never one that sits well with me. Mr. Obama comparing them to the military in terms of strength and funding is downright terrifying.

• Record on the Right to Bear Arms

Mr. Obama's voting record shows a contempt for private ownership of firearms and the right of private citizens to defend themselves. While in the Illinois Senate Mr. Obama voted against allowing women with domestic violence protective orders to carry concealed weapons. He voted against allowing the sale of firearms within five miles of a school or park, which would prohibit the sale of firearms within almost all of the inhabited parts of the United States. He is also in favor of a nation wide ban on the right of private citizens to carry concealed weapons.

• Wall Street Bailout

$700 billion dollars with almost no oversight for the foxes guarding the financial hen house. He could have opposed it. He could have stood up and said that the sky wasn't falling, the world would keep spinning, and that Congress should move with all deliberate speed to create a bill that didn't reward the neo-robber barons of the last two decades and moved aggressively against the corporate criminals who destroyed the retirement accounts of millions of Americans. But he didn't. He bought into the Chicken Little atmosphere in Washington. Rather than providing leadership, Obama followed. And we'll be paying the price- literally- for decades to come.

• Support for FISA

Rather than refusing to support a bill which granted immunity to telecommunication companies who gave information about your private communications to federal spooks, Mr. Obama caved in fits and starts to the Bush Administration's demands. He could have simply voted against the bill. He could have supported a bill that did not grant immunity to the telecom companies and led the Democratic party in repeatedly only sending such a bill to Bush's desk. Instead he engaged in the type of milquetoast, conciliatory liberalism we've come to expect from Washington politicians.

• No End to the Drug War

Barack Obama is for decriminalizing possession of marijuana. Except he doesn't know what that means. And sometimes he isn't for it at all. He has waffled on eliminating the discrepancy between crack and powder cocaine sentencing. And the selection of War on Drugs Hall of Famer Joe Biden as his running mate should give pause to anyone looking for meaningful change in federal drug policy. Again, this is another example of President-Elect Obama being just another typical Washington politician, changing the drapes at the White House without bringing meaningful systemic change.

• Takes AIPAC's Line on Israel

I am aware that Israel is a third rail of American politics. I do not expect politicians to take a line even approximating mine on the Arab-Israeli conflict. But Barack Obama has consistently kowtowed to the far-right AIPAC line in an attempt to prove his pro-Zionist bona fides. He supported Israel during their illegal invasion of Lebanon, an invasion designed to combat a political party and not the government of Lebanon. He is the first presidential candidate to back Israel's position on an undivided Jerusalem as the perpetual capital of Israel. He has repeatedly described the ruling government of the Palestinian Authority as a "terrorist organization" and says that "no options are off the table" (for those unaware, this is a long standing coded phrase meaning "nuclear strike") in regards to deterring Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

• Energy Policy
  

A hardcore proponent of ethanol subsidies from a corn-producing state, Barack Obama has chosen political expediency over truth. The facts show that ethanol is not a viable alternative to fossil fuels and does little more than drive up food prices- particularly in the developing world. He also supports liquid coal development and has been inconsistent on offshore drilling. His energy policy has largely been lurching from one politically expedient opinion to another.

• Vacillation on the Cuba Embargo

In another example of changing his position for political expediency, Barack Obama was originally in favor of normalizing relations with Cuba and ending the embargo which has crippled the island nation since the collapse of the Soviet Union. Of course, when he entered the general election Florida was in play with its large, ultra right wing Cuban exile community. He then hardened his stance, coming out in favor of continuing the embargo until such time that all political prisoners were freed. We have little reason to expect anything but status quo on Cuba from the Obama Administration.

• The Afghanistan War

Mr. Obama not only plans to continue the War in Afghanistan but to increase the troop load there. It seems important to be very clear on the history of the War in Afghanistan. America was never attacked by Afghanistan. America was attacked by an extra-governmental force whose base of human resources is in Pakistan and whose financial support comes largely from Saudi Arabia. A criminal pursuit of the perpetrators of 9/11 is not only the sensible response (similar to how the Israelis pursued Black September), it is also the preferred response everywhere outside of the United States and Britain. It is unclear how Barack Obama's Afghanistan policy differs from that of the Bush Administration other than being "bigger, better, more."

• Unprecedented Corporate Moneys Raised

The Democratic Party is not a labor party. It does not draw the majority of its resources from the people of this country, their labor unions, or civic organizations. Much was made of the small donors that supported Barack Obama in his pursuit of the Presidency. Almost nothing was made of the fact that wall street investment banks were among his largest donors. Also noteworthy is support from telecom giants and insurance companies- which of course have nothing to do with the President-Elect's positions in favor of immunity for illegal spying and against single-payer health care.

Why Does This Matter?

The British labor movement gave critical support to the pre-New Labour Labour Party using the slogan "Vote Labour With No Illusions." The intent was to remind the British working class that Labour may have had advantages over Tories, but this alone wasn't saying much. Further, the Labour Party needed a militant labor movement to hold their feet to the fire to ensure that the demands of the working class were acted upon.

Anyone with doubts that this applies just as much in America as it does in Little Britain is encouraged to look at the activities of the present Congress, elected with a clear mandate to end the War in Iraq, and arguably a mandate to impeach the Vice President. Simply cheerleading for what passes for "the left" in American electoral politics is woefully insufficient to affect social change. In fact, it is probably counterproductive. While the desire to remain optimistic is understandable, it is far more important that Americans remain vigilant and demand more of their government. This must begin with a hard, thorough look at the record of Barack Obama and a realistic evaluation of where he stands on the political spectrum. Slightly to the left of Bill Clinton is an improvement over Bush 43 to be sure- but not much of one.