My response to May 09, 2008, "Obama Needs a History Lesson," By Jack Kelly, from RealClearPolitics

Posted by: balkanization

Date: 05/10/2008 03:17PM

Sorry, Mr. Kelly, weak history on the part of the pundit on this one. Orwell made the point that one's enemies today are allies tomorrow in his 1984, written in 1948 -- get it? -- which is a date relevant to two of Sen. Obama's and your examples. Everyone concerned was aware that ally Russia/Joseph Stalin had been and could be an enemy. Still, as Churchill noted when asked why he a staunch anti-Communist would work with Stalin; he replied he would work with the devil himself, if he thought it could bring down Hitler faster. (Which means, of course, that your view, Mr. Kelly, also goes against Churchill's.)

The problem, of course, is that keeping to a hard-and-fast view of who the enemy is (dog-headed, enemy to mankind, eats babies, etc.) means living in a non-existent world. It means that we identify an enemy -- USSR invading Afghanistan for example -- and then support those resisting that enemy unreservedly -- weapons to the Taliban, etc., with little sense that roles can change. It turns out, in the real world, the enemy is not dog-headed, eating babies, etc. Diplomacy is as much a part of realpolitik as iron and blood.

Perhaps there is nothing all that new in what Sen. Obama said. But it makes a lot more sense that Mr. Kelly's Medieval mantras.

obama leads in superdelegates according to abc

I made the following post on abc (for some reason I don't know how to spell gaugeing):

Superdelegates want what is best for the party; but their best way of gauging that is to look at the popular vote and the pledged delegate count. Sen. Obama leads in those two categories and, oh yes, he leads in amount of money raised by large numbers of people sending in small amounts. Superdelegates are not directing this parade; they are simply joining in.

So Sen. Obama and his organization have shown they have the moxie to win. Sen. McCain and his policies will certainly benefit the super-rich; but the idea that John and Cindy are less elitist than Barack and Michelle is laughable. The latter might have more education; but folks, that used to be a good thing.

I appended the following to a petition for an inquiry demanded by John Kerry (at least I tried to; his website doesn't appear to work too well_.

I am quite concerned about the growth of what Eisenhower warned about: the growth of the military-industrial complex. Particularly egregious are no-bid and cost-plus contracts going to a small group of semi-private firms. If these firms are then "planting" the military support of policies that benefit the bottom line of these firms, this is EXACTLY what Pres. Eisenhower warned against. Separation of Public and Private when one is discussing War is just as essential as separation of Church and State.

The original:

• Help get an investigation of the Pentagon pundit program

• Nearly two weeks ago, the New York Times reported on a covert Pentagon plan in, “an effort to transform the analysts into a kind of media Trojan horse — an instrument intended to shape terrorism coverage from inside the major TV and radio networks." The goal of this program: get coverage favorable to Bush Administration policies.

• But since that story, there's been little effort to find out more about this program, and essentially zero coverage of the revelation on television news.

• With a near total blackout on the story from the television news networks, we need the American people to demand answers!

• Co-sign the letter John Kerry wrote to the GAO demanding an investigation and help us get answers.