Obama Does Not Rhyme With Obama

Michael Moore has , it seems, decided that the democrat corporatism can “crush” the republican corporatism if they can convince Michelle Obama to run as their candidate for president in opposition to the republican’s racist frat-ass Donald Trump. This promotional material by Moore is a very revealing contemporary manifestation of what has been, for a long time, a perverse method of operating by the democrats.

I must admit that I agree with Mr. Moore on two points.

One point being that none of the people currently seeking to become the democrat nominee for president in 2020 are capable of convincing me that they could or would be able to, in any necessary way, change the corrupt system which is exemplified by Trump’s ugly, arrogant “america”-first, privately corporately manipulated, crap. The biggest problem however, is that the candidates who Moore has decided are lacking the ability to “crush” Trump are clearly all typical examples of what it means to be a democrat. There is not one of these candidates who is ready to create a party which might effectively oppose the militarizing capitalist republicanism which the democrat party and the republican party worship together. If they were, they would certainly NOT be members of the democrat’s (and republican’s) organized system of mandatory inequality and preferential treatment of private power. All of these candidates lack the necessary adherence to the belief that equal justice and a healthy environment require – at a minimum – that private capital must be subservient to the needs of those with the least power and that nationalistic patriotism insures that insiders (citizens) as well as outsiders (foreigners) will remain trapped in a sadomasochistic abusiveness.

The other point where I agree with Moore is that Michelle Obama could “crush” Trump and win the election. The problem is that the reason she could win is that Michelle Obama is in a position much like Trump was in 2016. The attempt by Moore to portray her as a “street fighter” is a deliberate misrepresentation of her recent history and, as has been the case with her husband and every other recent presidential candidate promoted by both the democrats and the republicans, misrepresentation of the character of their standard bearer is a mandatory prerequisite to manipulate the suckers into believing that each of these insiders is a maverick or a savior when they are not. There is nothing which would indicate that making Michelle Obama into a presidential candidate is anything beyond playing the same game again. Michael Moore wants us to believe that Michelle Obama’s popularity is a proof that she would be something more than just another prettified jockey riding their preferred corporate-owned horse. Trump had his suckers who believed much the same about him in 2016. Certainly Michelle Obama has a much more appealing personality and sense of style, but so did her warmongering, corporately privatizing husband.

So Moore is trying to find a way to save the corporately controlled democrat machinery from their long history of embarrassingly revealing spectacles of trying to openly appeal to the mean, arrogantly crass capitalists (as they did with the Clintons) and make people focus on someone whose affluence appears to be (stylishly) shiny and new. Moore wants to make the democrats look better than they are. This is the same sort of crap as when he cleverly worked to make it look as if the war against Iraq was less of a bipartisan project than it actually was and that the blame should be on the Bush administration while downplaying the fact that democrats, like Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and John Kerry had played significant roles in making the vicious slaughter happen. He wants people to swallow the ridiculous notion that Michelle Obama would effectively challenge a system by which she gained her celebrity. Maybe she would, but there is a scarcity of evidence to support that assumption (and Moore’s enthusiasm).

It seems that people who identify as democrat or republican need to embrace a willful blindness. On some of the worst assaults against human rights and equal justice perpetrated during the administration of George W. Bush, Barack Obama – as a US senator – would state his opposition to those assaults and then, turn around, and help make them happen. His skin color seems to have been a shield of immunity to his devoted and hypocritical supporters (many of whom still insist that Obama’s own predatory administration was some sort of break from the predatory scheming which it repeatedly reinforced through misrepresentation and obfuscations). If Michelle Obama is a “street fighter,” as Moore would have us believe, where is the record of her opposition to her own husband’s cunningly militarizing corporatism and where was her opposition to the militant corporatism of Hillary Clinton?

No, Obama does not rhyme with Obama. Rhyming words do so only when they are different words. “Obama” is a repetition of “Obama” and the fact that Moore wants us to believe that the name “rhymes” with itself is a clear indication that he is pumping gas into another flimsy balloon as a distraction from what really needs to happen.

At this point in time, a win by Michelle Obama is being invested with unwarranted descriptions by Michael Moore and these beliefs are a form of desperation whereby those who foolishly identify as democrats can ignore their own history of hypocrisy and fearfully delusional, passionate limitations. For democrats and republicans, real evidence is for losers when it comes to the possibility of boiling over in passionate delusions.

Hope and Change 2.0 has a long way to go in order to rise above gimmickry, just like the rest of the democrats who want to be president (but whom Moore would dump in favor of his delusional desire for a shinier- looking insider).

The answer we need is not within the democrats or republicans and their shared religion of capitalist domination over life. One wording which does rhyme with Obama is more trauma. Many may be repulsed by Trump, but they still cling to the system which enables such a repulsive manifestation.

More articles by:
August 22, 2019
George Ochenski
Breaking the Web of Life
Kenneth Surin
Boris Johnson’s Brexit Helter Skelter
Enrique C. Ochoa – Gilda L. Ochoa
It’s About Time for Ethnic Studies in Our K-12 Schools
Steve Early
A GI Rebellion: When Soldiers Said No to War
Clark T. Scott
Sanders And Bezos’s Shared, Debilitating, Basic Premise
Dan Corjescu
The Metaphysics of Revolution
Mark Weisbrot
Who is to Blame for Argentina’s Economic Crisis?
Howard Lisnoff
To Protect and Serve
Cesar Chelala
A Palestinian/Israeli Experiment for Peace in the Middle East
Binoy Kampmark
No Deal Chaos: the Brexit Cliff Face and Operation Yellowhammer
Josue De Luna Navarro
For True Climate Justice, Abolish ICE and CBP
Dean Baker
The NYT’s Upside Down Economics on Germany and the Euro Zone
August 21, 2019
Craig Collins
Endangered Species Act: A Failure Worth Fighting For?
Colin Todhunter
Offering Choice But Delivering Tyranny: the Corporate Capture of Agriculture
Michael Welton
That Couldn’t Be True: Restorying and Reconciliation
John Feffer
‘Slowbalization’: Is the Slowing Global Economy a Boon or Bane?
Johnny Hazard
In Protest Against Police Raping Spree, Women Burn Their Station in Mexico City.
Tom Engelhardt
2084: Orwell Revisited in the Age of Trump
Binoy Kampmark
Condescension and Climate Change: Australia and the Failure of the Pacific Islands Forum
Kenn Orphan – Phil Rockstroh
The Dead Letter Office of Capitalist Imperium: a Poverty of Mundus Imaginalis 
George Wuerthner
The Forest Service Puts Ranchers Ahead of Grizzlies (and the Public Interest)
Stephen Martin
Geopolitics of Arse and Elbow, with Apologies to Schopenhauer.
Gary Lindorff
The Smiling Turtle
August 20, 2019
James Bovard
America’s Forgotten Bullshit Bombing of Serbia
Peter Bolton
Biden’s Complicity in Obama’s Toxic Legacy
James Phillips
Calm and Conflict: a Dispatch From Nicaragua
Karl Grossman
Einstein’s Atomic Regrets
Colter Louwerse
Kushner’s Threat to Palestine: An Interview with Norman Finkelstein
Nyla Ali Khan
Jammu and Kashmir: the Legitimacy of Article 370
Dean Baker
The Mythology of the Stock Market
Daniel Warner
Is Hong Kong Important? For Whom?
Frederick B. Mills
Monroeism is the Other Side of Jim Crow, the Side Facing South
Binoy Kampmark
God, Guns and Video Games
John Kendall Hawkins
Toni Morrison: Beloved or Belovéd?
Martin Billheimer
A Clerk’s Guide to the Unspectacular, 1914
Elliot Sperber
On the 10-Year Treasury Bonds 
August 19, 2019
John Davis
The Isle of White: a Tale of the Have-Lots Versus the Have-Nots
John O'Kane
Supreme Nihilism: the El Paso Shooter’s Manifesto
Robert Fisk
If Chinese Tanks Take Hong Kong, Who’ll be Surprised?
Ipek S. Burnett
White Terror: Toni Morrison on the Construct of Racism
Arshad Khan
India’s Mangled Economy
Howard Lisnoff
The Proud Boys Take Over the Streets of Portland, Oregon
Steven Krichbaum
Put an End to the Endless War Inflicted Upon Our National Forests
Cal Winslow
A Brief History of Harlan County, USA
Jim Goodman
Ag Secretary Sonny Perdue is Just Part of a Loathsome Administration