Obama and Romney: Brothers of the Same Imperial Lodge


by BAR executive editor Glen Ford

Monday’s performance by the top presidential contenders turned out to be a grand consensus on foreign policy. “There is not one ray of daylight between the two.” Since Obama and Romney have no substantive disagreements, the choice is simple: vote for – or against – the one you think is most competent at waging imperial war. Peace and the rule of law are not options, on either ticket. Welcome to the Imperial Hegemony Dome.


Obama and Romney: Brothers of the Same Imperial Lodge

by BAR executive editor Glen Ford

Romney lies about what he has said in the past, while Obama lies about what he has done.”

Debate? What debate? What we witnessed Monday night was the total hegemony of imperial corporate ideology, served up in chocolate and vanilla flavors. On every point of substance, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are indistinguishable – not just equally evil, but identically so. On foreign policy, there is not one ray of daylight between the two.

In 2011, Obama was simultaneously waging drone and bomb wars against five countries: Libya, Somalia, Yemen, Afghanistan and Pakistan (he’s currently down to four, plus a proxy terror war in Syria). Romney applauds all of these aggressions, with the caveat that he would bring superior “leadership” to the carnage. Given these facts, how shall we rate the contenders?

If you believe that Romney – who has never caused a cruise missile to be fired in anger – is a dangerous warmonger, then what about the guy whose five actual wars Romney fully endorses? Do you prefer Obama’s martial leadership qualities to Romney’s? If leadership in war involves building foreign and domestic support for war-making, then Obama is your man. After all, he’s neutralized most domestic anti-war sentiment while leading (and definitely not from behind) his NATO and royal Persian Gulf allies in the nine-month pulverization of Libya – great feats of imperial stewardship!

But, of course, that raises the question: should peace-loving voters, given a choice, prefer politicians who are very good at global aggression – who make war palatable to domestic and foreign audiences, as Obama does – or should peaceful folk opt for the less gifted warmonger, one so poorly endowed in leadership skills that he brings discredit to the imperial project, as did George Bush (and as seems likely under a President Romney)? Such is the nature of the choice facing those who cannot resist voting for one or the other of Monday’s contenders: the wannabe destroyer of worlds, or the guy with all the bloody hash marks on his arm.

On every point of substance, Barack Obama and Mitt Romney are indistinguishable – not just equally evil, but identically so.”

One can also choose one’s favorite liar. Romney lies about what he has said in the past, while Obama lies about what he has done. Often, they share the same lies. The two got indignant with each over whether Romney, in Obama’s words, “recently gave a speech saying that we should have 20,000 more” troops in Iraq, today, rather than pulling out last December. No doubt, Romney said it. But, throughout the summer of last year, Obama’s civilian and military officials were negotiating with the Iraqi government to allow up to 10,000 U.S. troops to remain. A July 5, 2011, Associated Press story, for example, reported that “the White House has worked out options to keep between 8,500 and 10,000 active-duty troops to continue training Iraqi security forces during 2012, according to senior Obama administration and U.S. military officials.” The talks continued deep into the fall. In the end, Obama had no choice but to honor the withdrawal agreement signed by George Bush, or put the U.S. in a state of war with the Iraqi government and people. But he begged and pleaded to stay. His whole narrative of having always intended a total pullout is a lie – with Romney now chiming in “me too.”

Both candidates tell the same lie about Afghanistan. There are no plans, and no agreement with the Afghan government, for anything remotely resembling a total pullout in 2014. It’s a game of “name change,” with the remaining U.S. troops to be designated as “trainers” rather than “combat” soldiers. How many? The U.S. military is planning for 25,000 troops, including many thousands of Special Forces. When President Obama took the oath of office, there were 34,000 American soldiers in Afghanistan – so we are mainly discussing undoing Obama’s own “surge” of 66,000 in additional troops. Romney endorsed the fake “pullout” – so, at least the two are lying in synch.

His whole narrative of having always intended a total pullout is a lie – with Romney now chiming in ‘me too.’”

Obama’s most noxious statement of Monday evening, on the death of Moammar Gaddafi, revealed the president’s core rottenness as a human being:

And to the governor's credit, you supported us going into Libya and the coalition that we organized. But when it came time to making sure that Gaddafi did not stay in power, that he was captured, Governor, your suggestion was that this was mission creep, that this was mission muddle.”

Gaddafi was not “captured,” he was murdered, a knife stuck up his rectum by U.S.-backed thugs after his convoy was disabled by what appear to have been U.S. bombers. The world saw the Libyan leader’s torture on video, and heard Secretary of State Hillary Clinton brag, “We came, we saw, he died.”

For Obama, it seems that a momentary interval between being seized by an enemy and executed, constitutes a “capture” – for which he takes credit, but not the murder. Although his choice of words may not constitute a lie, it speaks volumes to his character.

Romney’s “mission creep” comment may have been a symptom of inner caution in foreign policy. But it seems that was a passing moment, and he is now gung ho on Obama’s Libya adventure.

Obama failed to revel, at the debate, in having used the Libya operation to invent a new definition of war. Since no Americans were killed, there was no reason for Congress to invoke the War Powers Act, said Obama. Although thousands might be slaughtered by U.S. and allied firepower, Obama has declared that, henceforth, no state of war or even “conflict” may exist unless Americans are also harmed.

Obama failed to revel, at the debate, in having used the Libya operation to invent a new definition of war.”

Mitt Romney seems to have no problem with the Obama war/non-war doctrine. He agrees that Syria’s “Assad must go,” presumably in the same manner as Gaddafi. Romney’s spin on the arming of jihadis is that the U.S. should avoid it, while Obama’s lie is that Washington isn’t doing it. Romney wants the U.S. to draw even closer to Israel. Obama says, truthfully, that he already has “created the strongest military and intelligence cooperation between our two countries in history.” Mitt said amen to that.

Presumably, the Republican and Democratic standard bearers covered every important area of potential disagreement during the 90 minutes allotted – and found none. So, which warmongering, imperialist mad dog are you going to vote for? The one who is actually waging multiple wars and savaging international order, or the rookie?

Ain’t imperial hegemony a bitch?

BAR executive editor Glen Ford can be contacted at [email protected].


An "Aha Moment"

Beverly,  again, and again, and AGAIN...this is precisely why I want Obama to win.  You see Negroes won't complain about him droning 5 countries w/o a declaration of war, or holding a white boy in solitary confinement for exposing US war crimes, or sending 3000 troops to "free" African, or helping his buddy Bill Clinton turn Haiti into a sweatshop.

They don't and won't give a shit about that.  But when Big Mama and nem and Uncle Bobby and Cousin Sue start acting up in church, not because the got the holy spirit but because they can't feed themselves or they chil ren and the church can't help cause its broke too, and the building fund's been misappropriated by Deacon Smith who ran off with the organist.. and Pastor Williams done start drinking...then.. they gonna all wake up and look around and say: "GLORY BE THE FUNKS ON ME!!!

It's going to be PRICELESS.

Now to those of you who think I'm a socio or psychopath (like Obama and ALL US Presidents) whoa nelly.  I just think yall Negroes need a wakeup call and your selfishness and mental sloth won't allow you to get the "aha moment" unless somebody f**king wit yo guvmint check.  It's that simple because by ex-mother-in-law, who was a hard working woman who deserved everything she earned, soured on his ass when he started messing with the Social Security colas (she had crippling back surgery from spending 30+ years in a factory foundry).

You wanna talk "pocket book issues," then damnit lets talk pocket book issues.  You can't and won't get a wakeup call until the betrayal is felt as deep as Lake Baikal.

They ain't hearing you (us) right now Bev, oh.. but trust me.. they will if Obama is re-elected.  It's gonna be a Happy New Year, the Year of the Rat, and we ain't talking Chinese New Year my friend.

p.s.  If it's any consolation to White folks, trust me, if Obama is re-elected he WILL be the first and last Black president, so yall racists might wanna do yourselves a favor and take one for the team and vote the Big O.  LOL


Outstandi                     =                        t                        ing blog post/editorial, Mr. Ford, outstanding, sir!

                        Exce l l ent    supportive article:



Seems Bro Glen Ford is a Bit PISSED w All The BS RE:

In this article & by the end of his commentary 'A Profitable Genocide'- it would seem Bro Glen Ford is a bit PISSED off w all this 'Lesser of 2 Evils' crap coming from Obama-Laiden Negro & white pseudo-progressive talking-heads. Sometimes you just get sick & tired of the same-ole / lame-ole SOS BS being repackaged & re-sold like its brand-new 'wisdom'.


To see just how much Obama & RMoney actually sound alike see DN!'s 'As Obama & Romney agree on Syria, Israel & War- 3rd Party Candidates give Real Alternatives': [@www.democracynow.org/2012/10/23/exclusive_as_obama_and_romney_agree]. The contrast between what Jill Stein & Rocky Anderson said vs the saber rattling of Obama & RMoney, is crystal clear. BUT IMO it's a tactical mistake that Anderson & Stein technically oppose each other now, as it was when Sis McKinney & Nader technically opposed each other in 2008. Anderson & Stein's views on most issues are similar enough that IMO it would have made more sense to have combined their ticket to have more of an impact. 

Obama & RMoney had a fake spat over so-called defense [actually military] spending- w RMoney claiming Obama is cutting DoD [& CIA, NSA, DHS, DOE, etc] spending [a LIE], while O-Bomb-er saying RMoney Math does NOT Add up [True- but neither does Obama's]. But then Obama said 2 things that's key- 1} The US spends as much on its military as the rest of the World combined - 2} He wants the military to be able to 'Project Power' anywhere in the world [RMoney added in multiple theaters simultaneously]. This of course echoes DoD's 'Full Spectrum Dominance' Doctrine- which is not about defending the homeland, but about building & maintaining a global imperialist military machine.

The 2Xs Congressional Medal of Honor recipient Gen Smedley Butler in his essay 'War is a Racket' gave a key to what a defensive posture should actually look like for the US military, stating that- Except the US is attacked &/or the Congress officially declares war as required by the US Constitution, the US Navy should venture / patrol not more than 300 miles off the US' coast-line. 


PS: In their final debate both O-Bomb-er & RawMoney showed their true imperialistic / war-mongering / chicken-hawk selves. RMoney tried to sound extra Bushite-cowboy type tough- especially RE Iran & Syria, while O-Bomb-er sounded a bit more clever yet tough. Never-the-less O-Bomb-er boasted about his role in devastating Libya & slaughtering Khadaffi & his determination to see that Assad [& Syria] suffer the same fate.
- But when it comes to Iran, people like Phyllis Bennis say there's a clear distinction between O-bomb-er & RawMoney RE Iran, because RMoney is more likely to go along w Bibi's plans to do Iran [so-called Bibi's vs O-Bomb-em's red-line]. But in that 3rd debate O-Bomb-er literally boasted about the recent joint US / IDF war games maneuvers [the largest of its kind], & the economic warfare he's spearheaded to try to devastate Iran's econ. Then there's the nefarious covert ops inside Iran itself to try to destabilize Iran from within- which he didn't mention. One would think that folks like Ms Bennis are astute enough to know that these acts, along w intrusions into a targeted nation's territorial coast &/or air-space w ships &/or planes of war, are classic means used to provoke a shooting war- especially when efforts at negotiations are at best disingenuous or have been outright sabotaged &/or rejected.  This is what FDR used to provoke Japan to attack Pearl Harbor- which changed the public's opinion  RE: WWII, -&- what LBJ did in Vietnam w the 'Gulf of Tonkin' false-flag incident [ironically both FDR & LBJ were/are considered 'liberal' Dim Pres]. 

I suspect O-Bomb-er's clever enough to know that Russia, w Putin at the helm, is NOT likely to just stand-by & let the US get away w launching an unprovoked attack on Iran. But if he can provoke Iran into lashing out [out of frustration & desperation]- by using economic stranglehold type warfare & subversive covert ops type warfare within Iran, this may neutralize Russia from responding [immediately at-least]. As Bro Glen Ford says- He's the more Effective Evil!

We're screwed!!! The Imperial Lodge is about to haze us

This would be more appropriately posted under that picture of Obama wearing the King's Crown, check out this wild "New World Order," "Obama Deception" shit from Glenn Greenwald.

This dude is absolutely incredible, unbelievable, "Hope and Change" my ass, if there ever was a Manchurian Candidate it's this President.  It makes me go back to what he said in 08 while campaigning for President, it should have been a clarion call but stupid m***f***ers were to caught up in the Melissa Perry symbolic bullshit:

"The Surge has Succeeded Beyond Our Wildest Dreams."


No shit.  And you Mr. President have succeeded in instituting full blown facist, corptocracy beyond MY(our) wildest dreams.

It's OVER folks, we all just f**king around on the margins, its game, set, match to Obama and the New World Order.


The only thing that will change the current Emperors sitting in the WH is the full and complete collapse of the United States and Western allies.  But even then don't expect them go down without a fight.  "Renewable Energy?"  You gone get renewable energy because all of our asses will be walking around glowing like a light bulb when full-scale nuclear war occurs.

Vote?  For what, to legitimize the current and future dictators aka U.S. Presidents?

Obama Moves to Make the 'War on Terror' Permanent

Complete with a newly coined, creepy Orwellian euphemism – 'disposition matrix' – the administration institutionalizes the most extremist powers a government can claim 


The Washington Post has a crucial and disturbing story this morning by Greg Miller about the concerted efforts by the Obama administration to fully institutionalize – to make officially permanent – the most extremist powers it has exercised in the name of the war on terror.

Based on interviews with "current and former officials from the White House and the Pentagon, as well as intelligence and counterterrorism agencies", Miller reports that as "the United States' conventional wars are winding down", the Obama administration "expects to continue adding names to kill or capture lists for years" (the "capture" part of that list is little more than symbolic, as the US focus is overwhelmingly on the "kill" part). Specifically, "among senior Obama administration officials, there is broad consensus that such operations are likely to be extended at least another decade." As Miller puts it: "That timeline suggests that the United States has reached only the midpoint of what was once known as the global war on terrorism."

In pursuit of this goal, "White House counterterrorism adviser John O Brennan is seeking to codify the administration's approach to generating capture/kill lists, part of a broader effort to guide future administrations through the counterterrorism processes that Obama has embraced." All of this, writes Miller, demonstrates "the extent to which Obama has institutionalized the highly classified practice of targeted killing, transforming ad-hoc elements into a counterterrorism infrastructure capable of sustaining a seemingly permanent war."

"Targeted killing is now so routine that the Obama administration has spent much of the past year codifying and streamlining the processes that sustain it."

The Post article cites numerous recent developments reflecting this Obama effort, including the fact that "CIA Director David H Petraeus is pushing for an expansion of the agency's fleet of armed drones", which "reflects the agency's transformation into a paramilitary force, and makes clear that it does not intend to dismantle its drone program and return to its pre-September 11 focus on gathering intelligence." The article also describes rapid expansion of commando operations by the US Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC) and, perhaps most disturbingly, the creation of a permanent bureaucratic infrastructure to allow the president to assassinate at will:

"JSOC also has established a secret targeting center across the Potomac River from Washington, current and former U.S. officials said. The elite command's targeting cells have traditionally been located near the front lines of its missions, including in Iraq and Afghanistan. But JSOC created a 'national capital region' task force that is a 15-minute commute from the White House so it could be more directly involved in deliberations about al-Qaeda lists."

The creepiest aspect of this development is the christening of a new Orwellian euphemism for due-process-free presidential assassinations: "disposition matrix". Writes Miller:

"Over the past two years, the Obama administration has been secretly developing a new blueprint for pursuing terrorists, a next-generation targeting list called the 'disposition matrix'.

"The matrix contains the names of terrorism suspects arrayed against an accounting of the resources being marshaled to track them down, including sealed indictments and clandestine operations. US officials said the database is designed to go beyond existing kill lists, mapping plans for the 'disposition' of suspects beyond the reach of American drones."

The "disposition matrix" has been developed and will be overseen by the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC). One of its purposes is "to augment" the "separate but overlapping kill lists" maintained by the CIA and the Pentagon: to serve, in other words, as the centralized clearinghouse for determining who will be executed without due process based upon how one fits into the executive branch's "matrix". As Miller describes it, it is "a single, continually evolving database" which includes "biographies, locations, known associates and affiliated organizations" as well as "strategies for taking targets down, including extradition requests, capture operations and drone patrols". This analytical system that determines people's "disposition" will undoubtedly be kept completely secret; Marcy Wheeler sardonically said that she was "looking forward to the government's arguments explaining why it won't release the disposition matrix to ACLU under FOIA".

This was all motivated by Obama's refusal to arrest or detain terrorist suspects, and his resulting commitment simply to killing them at will (his will). Miller quotes "a former US counterterrorism official involved in developing the matrix" as explaining the impetus behind the program this way: "We had a disposition problem."

The central role played by the NCTC in determining who should be killed – "It is the keeper of the criteria," says one official to the Post – is, by itself, rather odious. As Kade Crockford of the ACLU of Massachusetts noted in response to this story, the ACLU has long warned that the real purpose of the NCTC – despite its nominal focus on terrorism - is the "massive, secretive data collection and mining of trillions of points of data about most people in the United States". 

If you happen to be in a swing state:

Vote for Obama, and encourage Republican's and "independent's" to stupidly waste their vote on the fascist Gary Johnson:


Anti-Obama activist should give themselves some breathing space.

The Nato ruling class has chosen the "reformed" Nazi secessionist. There were two Nazi secessionist that the ruling class took a serious look at during this years Republican debates:

1) Ron Paul: Scottish Rite Freemason's, the people who brought you the curse of Ham, slavery, states rights, KKK, Jim Crow, Dixiecrats etc..

2) Mitt Romney: the Freemasonic Mormon Mafia.

Obama is the only one who's going to defeat an immediate nuclear 9/11, full blown Nazism, polygamy: female slavery, and internment camps, (Romney personnel stocked from top to bottom with "Neocons" and Mormon's, the same people who did 9/11. That's why he didn't come forward with his apocalyptic, Mormon/Zionist foreign policy, and agreed with Obama's "moderate" warmongering).



Obama's Stepin Fetchit

Jewry is upset with Obama for taking too long to start WWIII by attacking Iran.  Romney won't hesitate.  Jewry perfers Romney.

Not so fast my friend....Obama is a con artist

Media is manipulating us.  Check out Dennis Ross himself dropping knowledge on Obie Wan.

Typical Obama/media collusion, make everyone think he's not on board with a particular concept (favored or slightly more favorable to progressives) when in fact he has head up ass, actually total body up ass.  After all wouldn't war be handled better by a Nobel Peace Prize Winner?  LOL

They won't get rid of the useful idiot that quick.


Former Official Dennis Ross: Obama’s Israel Ties ‘Without Precedent’

Dismisses 'Disinformation' About Obama's Israel Position

by Jason Ditz, October 28, 2012

Print This | Share This

Former State Department mainstay and current top official in the AIPAC-linked Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP) Dennis Ross is loudly defended President Barack Obama’s dedication to Israel, dismissing “disinformation” that has led critics to conclude Obama is less than a total shill for the Israel Lobby.

Nothing could be further from the truth, insists Ross, who says that Obama has supported Israel to a level that is entirely “without precedent” and that he has “never seen anything like” the lengths to which Obama will go to satisfy Israel’s government 

Note My Comment Below_What Obama's Likely Up-to RE Iran

Mr {un}Constitutional Law Prof /{un}Noble Peace Prize winning- O-Bomb-em's actions RE Iran are likely designed to make Iran capitulate [very unlikely]- or more likely to proke them into taking the first ['official'] shot, so O-Bomb-em can have card-blanche to Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran without looking like an outright war-monger ala Bush Jr, {insane}McCain & Bibi. Or he's trying to weaken Iran to the point that should the US / NATO / IAF go in, they'll face less/little formidable resistance. As Bro Glen Ford says O-bomb-er is 'The More Effective Evil'!

More than an Effective Evil.. A Clear and Present Danger

Obama is one of the most mendacious liers of all time, but not everyone is fooled:


Saturday, Oct 27, 2012 08:00 AM EDT

The progressive case against Obama

Bottom line: The president is complicit in creating an increasingly unequal -- and unjust -- society


EC:  I thought the youtube movie The Obama Deception was a little overwrought at the time, confess I never watched it cover to cover... but NOW.... I would say that he is the biggest Trojan Horse of all time.  A Clear and Present Danger because he is actively and consciously creating a Police State on top of a Plutocracy.

He had double-crossed the electorate at every opportunity he has, and lied and put it on the GOP, the big hairy monsters across the aisle.  Its clear from this piece at Salon and was clear even before it that Obama has deliberately and consciously done everything in his power to build HIS vision of America which is a White-Male Dominated Plutocracy with murderous tendencies.

By the way, the artificial housing bubble Obama has assidiously helped create with his foreclosure to rental scams and Quantitative Easing is about to deflate.


This current momentum in housing isn’t being caused by flush state budgets or solid wage growth. No, this is being caused by low inventory, big investors crowding out households, and a concerted effort to push mortgage rates lower.