The God of Politics

I’ve recently completed  series on religions, examining spirituality, and I realized there was  God I had left out.

Who is more dangerous, the leader who sends people into a war, or the bully who thinks he can just launch a few missiles? Has lobbing a few missiles ever resolved an issue, other than displaying  the impotency of the leader launching them? Isn’t that what we vilify Iran and North Korea for?

Our present Demigod started out as a demagog (that sounded so poetic I just had to use it). Having built his castle by appealing to common prejudices, he found that not only did he believe he was a God, so did his followers. He could do no wrong in their eyes, even when his dog rated an extra aircraft to Maine. Of course there were people on the plane, that doesn’t alter the fact that were it not for the dog, there would have been one aircraft. This during the “crippling sequester”, which has left servicemen on the front lines without hot meals. Oh, that’s not budget cuts, that’s due to the reduction in troops. Really? Never happened before.

He’s done really well appealing to the lowest common denominator. Class warfare worked really well, until it became evident he was more interested in the war than the solution. Feeding racial tensions was a winner, but it wasn’t as easy a sell when the victims were white. “If I had a son, he’d kill a stranger out of boredom” didn’t go over in middle America. Fortunately for him, that “lowest common denominator” also has the memory of a goldfish.

A comedian I once knew would respond to hecklers with “Go ahead and walk out, I already got your money!”. Our current President appears to be at the point he is saying the same to us. It doesn’t matter if he can convince us that the United States should intervene where the United Nations will not. It doesn’t matter if Congress votes against military action. He’s under the impression he can do it anyway, and what are you going to do about it?

In the web of lies, a petition was created to “Stop Assad”. Signers number in the dozens. “Syrians are killing Syrians. Click here to support President Obama’s plan to send Americans to kill Syrians, so Syrians can kill Americans”. Despite overwhelming rejection of his plan to get involved in another war, the President continues to press his case. Remember when the President of the United States’ “case” was the interests of the American people?

Consider this. Last summer, the military changed it’s rules about women in combat. Last month, congressman Charles Rangel began his campaign to reinstate the draft. Anyone having trouble with the math? After two unpopular wars and consistent degradation of the military spirit, and facing a war in which public support is at an all time low, little Susie will have the opportunity to be the first one on her block to come home in a box.

A recent statement by Vladimir Putin, suggesting a diplomatic response, has received the following comment: “So is it possible, that the threat of retaliation from our President, for the use of chemical weapons was actually used as a ruse to prompt the Russians into engaging the Syrians into defusing their chemical weapons stockpile? …if so, well played President Obama!” The apologists never give up. Diplomacy was never part of Obama’s strategy, he opened with threats and was backed into a corner when his bluff was called.

Last night, President Obama spoke to the nation, promising there would be no American boots in Syria, despite the fact there already are. I’m sure some people believed him. He was late taking the stage, gathering public opinion up to the last minute, and he appeared to be relieved to have some breathing room. Perhaps his most foolish statement was when he said “We have to take action, that’s what makes America different”. Any Cowboy stereotypes need to be reinforced? I thought what made us different was our following procedure, staying within international law. Right now the only stereotype he’s representing is poseur, all hat and no cattle.

With time perhaps we’ll locate the truth. Credible reports are stating to come in that the entire chemical attack was staged. Motive? I can think of three possibilities. 1) Assad used WMDs using untraceable sources to hide his involvement. 2) Rebels used WMDs against their own people to cross Obama’s red line and get the support of America. 3) Rebels possessed WMDs and accidentally contaminated themselves.

Actually, I support invading Syria. An invasion force led in person by Barack Obama, waving a flag, followed by all the congresspeople who voted for intervention.

After that, maybe the UN could do its job of enforcing the Geneva Protocols, as they have for almost one hundred years.