[ About | Archive | Network | Latest | RSS/XML Feed]

Heroic Obama

March 22, 2011 9:08 PM

"Who the hell do you think you are?" harrumphed Minister Farrakhan. The answer is obvious: he thinks he is Barack Hussein Obama, the Democrat Party figurehead who is almost a god among many liberals, and of whom, 46-50% of "likely voters" approve "somewhat," according to Rasmussen. Now, it seems, Obama has confused both his far-left supporters and his conservative critics, by bringing the US military into yet another "limited war" in Muslim turf, this time in Libya.  "Incoherent!" or worse are the cries from outraged parties ranging from Barbara Lee to Pat Buchanan. Is Obama's interventionist action truly incoherent? I think not. 

We are so used to hearing lies, distortions, exaggerations, and plain old-fashioned jive from Obama's lips that we might not recognize it when he is actually telling the truth. In this case, I believe he actually is telling the truth about Libya. Although he has waffled a bit, he seems to have announced repeatedly that he wants to depose Muammar Gaddafi as Libyan strongman, and to take action to stop a "humanitarian crisis." Obama has also made much of the fact that his action is supported by the Arab League and the French. He is even willing to join forces with the UK, which, as we all surmise, he hates. 

What's in it for Obama to do this? He has infuriated Michael Moore and the rest of the far US Left, provoked the epithet of "crusader" (not a compliment) from Vladimir Putin, and defied his pals the Chinese Communists. Why?

I am guessing at the answer, but I believe that is a highly educated guess, and that there is evidence to support it. 

The answer, I believe, is that Obama wants to be a hero. I think we are seeing the real Obama through all the hype and Aesopian language. He wants to rescue the Libyans from the tyrant Gaddafi, who reportedly has been savagely slaughtering them with high-tech weapons. I believe that he thinks that his chances of success will be higher in the 2012 campaign if he could be such a hero, but more importantly, that he will enhance his own self-respect, or regain it if he feels he has lost it. 

How can Obama convince himself that his Libyan intervention will make him a hero? For one, he buys the idea of the No-Fly Zone, which worked for the senior Bush in Iraq. Obama also sees himself as president, not of the united States of America, which he openly despises, but of the International Community, which is Libspeak for the world. Today Libya, tomorrow the world, as it were.

If my educated guess comes anywhere close to being correct, the implications are enormous: Obama's heroics indicate a rift between him and the establishment Left. That doesn't make  him a centrist or a conservative, but might establish him as a rival leftist, by crude analogy, a Trotsky competing with a Stalin. I would imagine that the establishment Left sees him as committing the heretical sin of "bourgeois individualism," and I would agree with them that's exactly what has happened. A little too much America has rubbed off on Obama for the taste of the Bolsheviks. 

A secondary effect be that Obama might peel off a few "moderates" and "independents" in 2012 by appearing to have tacked to the right. 

However, the most important question that remains, if my speculation is correct, is this: can Obama's heroics succeed? I actually think he has a good shot at it. If the No-Fly Zone has even partial success, Obama's press flacks can hype the fact that Obama's latest war will have interfered with Gaddafi high-tech attacks on his own people. After all, we have seen it all before with Bush Senior's heroics having protected Kurdish villagers from poison gas attacks by Saddam Hussein. 

Even if Gaddafi stays in power another decade or so, Obama could still come off as a hero, because the torture, rapes, and other atrocities will occur at ground level, out of reach of the press and spy satellites. This, I believe, is the answer to the pundits' question, "Why Gaddafi?" After all, they ask, the world is full of beastly tyrants, from the Congo to Myanmar. Why did Obama pick this tyrant? The answer is that Gaddafi has been too blatantly open in his attacks on his fellow Libyans, and that Obama has had his No-Fly Zone heroics handed to him on a silver platter by none other than the Arab League, with Nicolas Sarkozy in a supporting role.

The final question, then, is whether Obama's heroics are really a good thing for the world, and specifically for the USA? My answer: I doubt it. Perhaps it will be a good thing for some Libyans, and for British and French reminiscences of their former colonialist glory. Plus, it will boost Obama's self-respect, and goodness knows the poor schmuck needs a boost in that area.

But Libya heroics or no Libya heroics, it still looks like Iran will get her nukes, China will become more nasty and troublesome, North Korea will still torture her citizens at ground level, Israel will still defend herself to the death (lots of deaths, maybe) when the time comes, the US treasury will continue its headlong plunge deeper into debt, and Republican leadership hacks will still snivel like the cowards they are. 

[Keywords: impeach-them-all.org answer gaddafi heroics libya obama obama's   ]