This article in the LA Times ("Environmentalists baffled by Obama's strategy") strikes me as the perfect summation of the abyss of cognitive dissonance facing Obama's legion of increasingly confused but as yet still trusting supporters:
As a candidate for president, Barack Obama wooed environmentalists with a promise to "support and defend" pristine national forest land from road building and other development that had been pushed by the Bush administration.
But five months into Obama's presidency, the new administration is actively opposing those protections on some 60 million acres of federal woodlands in a case being considered by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. [...] Administration officials say that in some cases, they are defending the [Bush administration] policies to prevent the courts from settling the issues -- a prospect that would restrict the government's ability to set the environmental agenda. [...]
Whatever the overall strategy, the result has been a series of cases in which Obama appears to be taking positions in court that run counter to his stated goals.
Yeah, that's a shocker alright. We certainly haven't seen that before. Really, I'm stunned.
But the article hits its dadaist peak with the closing sentence:
If the courts agree with the government and allow the building of more roads in wilderness areas, the administration could face enormous difficulties in achieving its ultimate goal of keeping the roads out.
I know it's difficult not to burst into laughter (or tears?) when you read a sentence like that, but remember, this is the same Obama who demonstrates his anti-war credentials by increasing the military budget, his commitment to open government by refusing to release White House visitor records, his deep respect for the rule of law by opposing habeas corpus rights for the people we've kidnapped, etc, etc. If anyone can fight to allow the building of more roads in wilderness areas in order to advance the ultimate goal of keeping roads out of wilderness areas, he's the one.
Now, maybe I'm wrong to respond skeptically to these machinations. Maybe there really are plans within plans within plans here, and when we look back we'll see that Obama did it all because of his deep commitment to the environment. And if it really does end up that the the forests erupt in song and the bear dances with the woodchuck and the lion lies down with the lamb and the lamb lies down on Broadway, I'll be the first one cheering zen master Barack—the only person in all of human history who can build a house by setting it on fire.
But until then I think I'll just follow the path of least resistance and assume that if it looks like a betrayal, that's exactly what it is.
GEEK TIME: My all-time favorite koan, by way of the Unix fortune program:
A new koan:
If you have some ice cream, I will give it to you.
If you have no ice cream, I will take it away from you.
It is an ice cream koan.
And another favorite fortune that fits the theme:
Q: How many surrealists does it take to change a light bulb?
A: Two: one to hold the giraffe, and the other to fill the bathtub with brightly-colored machine tools.
Why this is all in the grand tradition of liberating people by blowing them to smithereens. Yes we con!
Posted by: Rob Payne | Saturday, June 20, 2009 at 08:53 PM
Another strong, clear, hard-hitting post; my sentiments exactly. Thanks for this.
Posted by: Rosemary Molloy | Sunday, June 21, 2009 at 03:33 AM
And let's not forget his efforts to prevent innocent people from being executed by ensuring that, well... innocent people get executed.
Posted by: SteveB | Sunday, June 21, 2009 at 06:46 AM
It could only be topped if they decided to build wooden roads, and then declared that no trees had been removed from the forest!
Posted by: Euripides | Monday, June 22, 2009 at 02:18 AM
NIce.
Posted by: Steve Malagodi | Monday, June 22, 2009 at 06:10 AM
I take it that Jedi ninja three-point-shooting chess master thingie doesn't work for you?
Posted by: LA Confidential Pantload | Monday, June 22, 2009 at 02:42 PM
No, Obama's clearly an accomplished political player—it's just that his fans don't realize that they're the ones he's playing the most.
And of all his constituencies, they're unique in that they're the only one that makes no significant demands of him, has no bottom line beyond which they won't go, and threatens no meaningful punishments. Obama knows full well that the vast majority of them will dutifully line up and vote for him in 2012 no matter what he does. He's got them so well-trained that they actually take betrayal as proof that he's on their side, ferchrissake. As a measure of their surrender of power, that's hard to beat.
Posted by: John Caruso | Monday, June 22, 2009 at 03:27 PM
You forgot to cite the explanation that Republicans are forcing Obama to do this against his will, because they have some kind of blackmail material on him. I've seen that one proffered in apparent seriousness about Democratic Congresscritters, so why not the President?
Posted by: Thomas Daulton | Monday, June 22, 2009 at 04:46 PM