President Obama is heading for confrontation with the US right wing forces on the hot button issues of health care reform and Obama’s appeasement of Hugo Chavez. Obama’s strategy seems more likely to drive the Republican Party into open rebellion against his government than to find a compromise on these issues.
It is tempting to believe that Obama wants armed confrontation with the US rightists.
However, Obama's left wing militants would be wrong to assume that
they would prevail over the US rightists in a new US civil war.
In reality, US right wing forces are far better armed, trained, and
mobilized to fight, in comparison with US leftists.
Also, Obama’s left wing militants should not assume that they have
moral superiority over the right wing forces. Obama's leftists point with scorn
to the close political ties between US Rightists and certain pro-US dictators
in the Third World. Obama's leftists also disparage US right wing
ambitions to build the world's most powerful empire, regardless of the cost in
US blood and treasure. Finally, the US leftists continue to assail the US
rightists as fascists and Nazis (which they are not).
A more honest and patriotic view of the US begin with a leftist awareness of Obama’s own long standing ties with Germany’s big capitalists via the Wall Street investment firm Goldman Sachs, which has supplied Obama with his ambassador to Germany and with Obama's entire management team at Treasury and at all the financial oversight agencies, according to a recent GAO study.
Moreover, as AIG’s collapse pulled down the US stock market and the US economy in the 2008, German banks were able to gain fast track access to Treasury funds for financial bailouts, sometimes at the expense of US banks, due to the actions of Treasury and its affiliated financial watchdog agencies.
The most daring power play by this Goldman Sachs/German cabal was to nominate the General Counsel of Cromwell & Sullivan to the highly sensitive position of Deputy Treasury Secretary. Cromwell & Sullivan is a leading Wall Street law firm that represented the personal financial interests of Germany’s Nazi leadership before, during and after WW II.
In short, as the close ties between Obama, Goldman Sachs and Germany come into full view, Obama will come under pressure to reclaim the moral high ground by mending fences with the US right wing while confronting Goldman Sachs and Germany. The Germans would then face a united and powerful USA instead of a state headed for civil war
In this context, a Grand Compromise is emerging between Obama and the US right wing on the highly contentious issue of health care reform. To reassure Obama’s left wing militants, Obama will announce acceptance of Richard Nixon’s program for National Health Insurance submitted to Congress in 1974. Nixon’s plan is attractive to US left wingers because its proposals go far beyond Obama’s initiatives today for enhancing the Federal role in health care reform.
What will the right wing Republicans gain in return for accepting Nixon's plan for national health insurance?
Obama and the US right wing leadership will agree to prevent a pro-Socialist power grab by the Federal bureaucrats as the Obama-Nixon health care plan is implemented. With diligent right wing oversight and Obama's good will, the US health care industry will remain firmly in the private sector.
Second, Obama will promise the US right wing he will prevail against Hugo Chavez in Honduras. From Honduras the US will move to liberate Bolivia, Venezuela itself, and then Iran. In sum, the Trotskyite ultra-leftist political blunders of Bolivia’s Evo Morales will evolve into Inca fascism will pull down Hugo Chavez and his so-called Bolivarian/Latin fascism, who in turn will pull down Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his Islamic fascism.
In fact, Obama’s supreme move would be to unite the US rightists
and leftists into an anti-Trotskyite strike force under FMLN leadership.
Scott Sullivan is a former Washington government employee and was the Senior Advisor for International Economics at the Crisis Management Center of the National Security Council, 1984 - 1986. Petroleumworld not necessarily share these views.
Editor's Note: All comments posted and published on Petroleumworld, do not reflect either for or against the opinion expressed in the comment as an endorsement of Petroleumworld. All comments expressed are private comments and do not necessary reflect the view of this website. All comments are posted and published without liability to Petroleumworld.
Fair use Notice: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of issues of environmental and humanitarian significance. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
All works published by Petroleumworld are in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.Petroleumworld has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is Petroleumworld endorsed or sponsored by the originator.Petroleumworld encourages persons to reproduce, reprint, or broadcast Petroleumworld articles provided that any such reproduction identify the original source, http://www.petroleumworld.com or else and it is done within the fair use as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Internet web links to http://www.petroleumworld.com are appreciated