In my previous posting, I discussed why Obama and the Democrats might want to bring back the military draft. There was a public reason that would be offered but, behind it, there would be the intent to make the self-selected military organization more politically reliable. A few days later, and to my great surprise, I came across this piece on “the corner”, National Review Online’s blog. The article quotes Obama on the military draft:
And if you go to small towns, throughout the Midwest or the Southwest or the South, every town has tons of young people who are serving in Iraq and Afghanistan. That’s not always the case in other parts of the country, in more urban centers. And I think it’s important for the president to say, this is an important obligation. If we are going into war, then all of us go, not just some.”
Obama correctly states that the people fighting are disproportionately from the small towns in flyover country - the red states. They aren’t from the urban areas. When Charles Rangel was advocating bringing back the draft a few years ago, he argued that people of color were disproportionately the ones fighting and dying. This was totally wrong. (Either Rangel was speaking out of ignorance or he was lying. As someone who has followed Rangel’s career over the years, I’d incline toward the latter view.) Note that Obama, unlike Rangel, gets it right. As with Obama’s statement to “Joe the Plumber”, I think Obama let his mask slip – he really is contemplating the need to create a politically reliable military.
In the previous post I said the following:
Do I think my worst case scenario will come to pass? Probably not – that’s why it is a “worst case” - but it is more likely than most people realize. The thing to keep in mind is that the unstated reasons for the policies I’ve mentioned need not be in the minds of most or even any of the people who enact them, including Obama, who is neither particularly smart nor any sort of strategic thinker.
I am retracting that last statement or, at least, modifying it. Obama is an ideologue – a Marxist radical – and I maintain that he is grotesquely ignorant of economics and foreign policy. However, he may well be a consummate political strategist. Consider that no one in modern U.S. history has been as signally unqualified to hold high office as Obama, yet he has risen faster than nearly every other Presidential aspirant (Teddy Roosevelt’s rise may be comparable). At the very least, Obama’s ascendancy bespeaks a high degree of political cunning.
Obama’s true genius is in self-promotion and the acquisition of power. He is exactly the sort of person the Framers had in mind when they put so many checks and balances into the Constitution. Today, most of those checks – those negative feedbacks – have been eliminated. Obama will have more scope for a malign ambition that any President in U.S. history.