“Project Foreign Policy—Style!” Introducing This Season’s Newest Look–Obama’s Magic Foreign Policy Shoes!

Welcome to the new show on Bravo, “Project Foreign Policy-Style“!  Stay tuned as our resident style guru, Fahreed Zakaria, guides us through the trials of putting together a brand new foreign policy!!  Or is it really new, or just an expert tweaking to create a fresh new look for the season?

First, we’ll rewind to the day before the election to the preview show. Scat’s Blog picked up American Lassie’s pre-election post on the Trilateral Commission ties to the Obama crowd (see below) and provided a link to a CNN transcript of CNN’s Global Public Square with host Fareed Zakaria. Guest judges included former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright; former chief of staff under Ronald Reagan, Ken Duberstein; and former national security adviser under Jimmy Carter, Zbigniew Brzezinski.

Maddy went into her closet stuffed with classic foreign policy attire and came up with this ’80’s vintage look from her PERSONAL collection!  Dated? Well, the panel thinks they can “MAKE IT WORK!” by personalizing and updating the look for Barack Obama!!

Obamas Magic Foreign Policy Shoes!
Obama’s Magic Foreign Policy Shoes!

The gist of this entire “Cliff Notes” review of foreign policy, held entirely to enhance Obama’s appearance,  was the assumption that Obama had already won and John McCain was irrelevant; that “style” was a huge issue; that while Bush was WAY too arrogant in dealing with other nations, even Bill Clinton’s foreign policy approach was a bit too “arrogant” ; and that Colin Powell got the “Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval.”

Of course, there was no mention of how the Bush Administration, as arrogant as they’ve been, did finally begin paying attention to foreign policy fashion and began talking with North Korea (finally following Clinton’s lead) and enlisting the aid of China in the process; how there have been contacts with Iran, and how the plans to deploy defense shield missiles in Poland (with Polish approval) has kept Russia off-guard (until now).

So, what did the foreign policy style gurus opine the day before the election?

First, note the glaring, implied assumption that Obama and his style leadership would win as Zakaria questions Brzezinski who echoes the Biden “gaffe” about the “testing” awaiting Obama:

ZAKARIA: All right. Let me ask you on the issue of policy, though. Does the president-elect start thinking about sending signals to foreign governments? Does he start actually sending those signals?

BRZEZINSKI: I think it depends on two things — one, on the nature of the president himself, and, two, on the circumstances.

I think what is going on right now — which is nothing less than a global crisis of American leadership, nothing less than that — I think the president-elect, whoever he is — and I have my own preference — will have to start sending signals right away, and will have to get ready to deal with some imminent problems.

Then, catch the comment by Brzezinski on who could become the new, fashion trend-setter as Secretary of State…and it isn’t Kerry or Richardson:

But then there is a second task he has to address, and that is to choose his Cabinet, to choose his foreign policy leadership, with which he will then make decisions.

And here, I think, a very important possibility that’s open to him — for the first time in a long time — is to create genuine bipartisanship in the decision-making process. And he can do that either by appointing a very distinguished leading Republican to the post of secretary of state. And there are some. And he has mentioned some of them by name. He’s traveled with some of them.

ZAKARIA: Who would you suggest they be?

BRZEZINSKI: Well, I would think, of course, such names come to mind, Senators Hagel and Lugar. But there may be others, but particularly those two.

I think that would be extremely reassuring and encouraging, both domestically and internationally, and would send the right signal.

Oops, where’s Olbermann on this? What does HIS fashion sense make of all this?

We then take a short detour for a rather smug exchange about McCain’s chance of winning the elite fashion world’s approval:

ZAKARIA: I should point out, there is, of course, a chance that Senator McCain will be elected president.

ALBRIGHT: Yes, we know …

(LAUGHTER)

The conversation continues with Albright discussing how the Obama crowd will change how things are done with a Republican Secretary of State, because, apparently with William Cohen, a Republican as Secretary of State under Clinton, things weren’t “bipartisan” enough. Frankly, it seems like just a bit too much “sensitivity” and only a chance to make a subtle dig at Clinton:

ZAKARIA: But let me ask you, Madeleine. You worked alongside a Republican secretary of defense, Bill Cohen. Does it work?

ALBRIGHT: I think it does. Though it was very funny, because when Bill first joined us, he used to say, “Well, you all have to do this.”

And we’d say, “What do you mean, ‘you all’? You are part of us.”

And I don’t know whether he thought of himself more as a senator dealing with the executive branch, or a Republican dealing with Democrats.

(LAUGHTER)

Ken and I have talked about this a lot.

DUBERSTEIN: Right.

ALBRIGHT: And we, in our own way, are going to do something about that, because I think, generally, there has to be a bipartisan approach. And people find it hard to believe that I was able to work with Jesse Helms. And because I was, I think we managed to get much further on NATO expansion, for instance, or a variety of issues.

You have to be able to work with the opposing party. That’s our system.

So, you’ve got a Republican in as Secretary of State, following the policies of Bill Clinton, but because his “style,” at first, isn’t quite up to par, the whole deal isn’t “bipartisan”?  But, oh, working with Jesse Helms..HEAVENLY!! HUH??

Zakaria then turns to the subject of Iran. Again, note how McCain’s fashion acumen is totally ignored in the set-up:

Madam Secretary, you spent some time trying to deal with Iran in your term in office, and you actually made some overtures — I thought very innovative ones. You apologized, in some sense, for America’s role in a coup that had brought the shah of Iran into power. You expressed regret about it. Some of those moves were reciprocated, many were not.

Obama faces, in a way, a similar challenge with regard to Iran.

Should he do something? Should he try and do something ambitious? Should he try and somehow restart a process you began?

Albright begins:

ALBRIGHT: The question is what’s going on in Iran, and whether — what the changes — Ahmadinejad is apparently not feeling well. He is facing elections.

I think we think of Iran as very monolithic, and it may not be. And that’s even more reason to actually begin talks with them. And talking is not necessarily making nice. It is delivering tough messages and listening.

(SNIP)

ZAKARIA: Ken, Reagan faced the same challenge in a way, because the issue was negotiating with the Soviets. He had seemed to suggest in his campaign that where they begin to — as he famously put it — they began to die on him, one after the other.

DUBERSTEIN: And then he finally got one he could work with, which was Mikhail Gorbachev.

But Reagan always thought that the power of ideas could triumph. And so, the answer was, of course you’re going to talk to your adversaries. And you’re going to listen to your adversaries, as well.

Duberstein then says that the U.S. hasn’t been talking enough (and certainly Clinton NEVER talked about the “power of ideas”), but then Brzezinski appears to say the opposite before giving away the store and Duberstein seems to agree:

ZAKARIA: Zbig, what about this point that both Madeleine and Ken are making about talking?

So, you start negotiations, perhaps with the Iranians. It seems to me Iran is not yet ready to rejoin the modern world. The regime rests on a certain oppositional element of defiance and opposition to the United States.

So, maybe we start talking and the talks don’t go very well. What do you then do?

BRZEZINSKI: Well, don’t forget that we have been negotiating with North Korea for quite a while, and we finally have made some progress. It hasn’t been consummated yet, but the progress has taken place. And China has played a very constructive role here.

It seems to me that, if we engage Iran in conversations, in negotiations — without preconditions, without demanding that, in advance of the negotiations, the Iranians concede on the critical issue of the negotiations — then we might be able to make some progress, and other countries are more likely to join us.

DUBERSTEIN: Precisely.

BRZEZINSKI: They’re also more likely to join us, if we don’t conduct these negotiations in an atmosphere of mutual abuse or of military threats, because that doesn’t help the atmosphere in the negotiations, and it also helps the Iranian extremists to mobilize public opinion behind them.

So, the style involved in the process is almost as important as the substance.

Then it’s back to how Clinton wore his foreign policy outfits. Not very well, it seems, so we get another dig at Clinton who apparently, displayed “arrogance” toward Europe…according to Zakaria.  (Are you buying this? It’s a new line on my radar…)

ZAKARIA: Madeleine, people in Europe tell me that they found that even dealing with the Clinton administration was tough in this regard, that there was — both on the economic side and the foreign policy side — there was a degree of American arrogance.

Oh, dear.

Then we come to the topic of Colin Powell, which reveals how Republican insider Duberstein has decided that the Colin Powell endorsement is the “Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval” for Republicans. Yes, Colin Powell takes home raves for his stylish appearance and performance at the U.N.!  And his accessories–those fake photos–to DIE FOR! (literally)

ZAKARIA: Let me ask you about your friend, Colin Powell.

DUBERSTEIN: Right.

ZAKARIA: Powell endorsed Obama — very public and very successful, I think, a moving endorsement.

You’re a Republican. You were Reagan’s chief of staff. Will you tell us who you’re going to vote for on Tuesday?

DUBERSTEIN: Well, let’s put it this way. I think Colin Powell’s decision is, in fact, the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval on Barack Obama.

ZAKARIA: And you’re going to take it?

DUBERSTEIN: I think so.

ZAKARIA: And we have to close. Thank you all.

So, the poster boy for the entire Bush Iraq-U.N.-Congress fake-out gets a free pass these days, I guess. If you’re an Obama supporter, history be damned! But, at least Powell LOOKS good, in either a uniform or a snazzy suit!

Remember, this little fashion preview/Obama infomercial happened the day before the election.  The judges simply swooned politely and in full agreement, over Obama’s haberdashery without one iota of concern about the man’ substance.  A waste of airtime if you wanted to find out anything about policy. But, SIGH, what a package they described!!! Perfect in every way, from his tasteful ties down to his classy footwear!

Now, let’s go back to that mention of Gorbachev.  Post-election, like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the PLO, Gorby is on the list of Obama admirers, perhaps hoping to get some sartorial tips from the man himself. (But what’s this I hear? Iran firing some sort of  new surface-to-surface missile?)  But Gorby is even MORE smitten.  From RIA Novosti, the Russian News Agency:

Gorbachev calls on Obama to carry out ‘perestroika’ in the U.S.

Former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev has said that the Obama administration in the United States needs far-reaching ‘perestroika’ reforms to overcome the financial crisis and restore balance in the world.

The term perestroika, meaning restructuring, was used by Gorbachev in the late 1980s to describe a series of reforms that abolished state planning in the Soviet Union.

(SNIP)

Gorbachev said that after transforming his country in the late 1980s, he had told the Americans that it was their turn to act, but that Washington, celebrating its Cold War victory, was not interested in “a new model of a society, where politics, economics and morals went hand in hand.”

(SNIP)

He told the paper that the world is waiting for Obama to act, and that the White House needs to restore trust in cooperation with the United States among the Russians.

“This is a man of our times, he is capable of restarting dialogue, all the more since the circumstances will allow him to get out of a dead-end situation. Barack Obama has not had a very long career, but it is hard to find faults, and he has led an election campaign winning over the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton herself. We can judge from this that this person is capable of engaging in dialogue and understanding current realities.”(MORE)

Oh, I get chills every time I hear someone talk about “politics, economics and MORALS” in the same breath, don’t you?  Makes me want to go out and buy a new outfit!

I guess Gorby is blinded by the glitz, perhaps…after all, he cites the Obama campaign as an indicator of being able to “engage in dialogue.”  “Hard to find faults?” What? Well, Gorby hasn’t been in power for about 20 years and is hopelessly stuck with those big shoulder pads from the era, which is unfortunate for Obama, judging from what the current Russian leadership thinks of the new fashionistas in D.C..

Seems Vladamir Putin’s hand-picked successor Dmitry Medvedev has just moved a few new missiles to Poland’s borders.  Now, it looks like Vlad himself maybe ready to strut his stuff on the runway again.

Constitutional Changes Go to Duma

…National media reports have suggested that Medvedev might step down as early as next year, perhaps on the pretext of the need for a new election under a new Constitution, clearing the way for Putin to return.

The Cabinet official said he also doubted that Medvedev would use the constitutional amendments as a pretext to leave before the end of his term. But he added that he had heard rumors since Putin’s first day as prime minister that he was already tired of being the prime minister.

Back during July’s European vacation,  Obama came out of a meeting with Gordon Brown “shaken” (British Commentators: The Chosen One Looked “Shattered” After Meeting Brown….and Did Cameron/Obama Discuss “Conservative Means” to Achieve “Progressive Goals”? and it looked like a repeat performance after his security briefing just after the election.

Can you image how the new Obama style will fare if he has to meet up with Putin? Obama will probably suggest a friendly round of shooting hoops and won’t those Magic Foreign Policy Shoes make it special! Putin himself showed great “anti-style style” when he took off his shirt and displayed some great beefcake photos out there before he left the top office, so I don’t know how Obama’s lightweight style will compare.

Maybe Obama will have to be carried out on a stretcher, with his Magic Shoe-bedecked feet dangling limply a la the Elton John’s big shoes as the he’s carried off in “Tommy,” after “The Champ” is defeated in spite of his rhinestone glasses and shimmering outfit!

The Big Boots

Oh, but you can bet that the little lights on Obama’s Magic Foreign Policy Shoes will still be flashing for the folks back home.  After all, even if you get creamed, you’ve gotta keep up your STYLE no matter what…and “MAKE IT WORK”!

*****

NOTES:

See Minute 4:25 of Elton’s Pinball Wizard video to recall how those big shoes were carried out with “The Champ” and disappeared in disgrace …

The Story Unfolds 2: Obama, Biden, Brzezinski, Carter…and the Trilateral Commission?

You can buy vintage LA Gear Lights here for about $400…


The Story Unfolds 2: Obama, Biden, Brzezinski, Carter…and the Trilateral Commission?

Editor’s Note: InsightAnaltyical welcomes American Lassie to the roster of contributors today!

~~By American Lassie

On October 6th, 2008, I write a post entitled The Legend Continues, The Story Unfolds….

Comments made by “Grail Guardian and “creeper” were so along the lines of my original thinking that I decided to search further into Obama’s background (such as we know of it) to see what I could come up with.

The tremendous amounts of money that he has raised and the protection he has been given by the MSM, along with the some of the surprising endorsements he has received lend credence to the idea that someone (or some powerful entity) with a lot of wealth and importance is pulling the strings behind the scenes.

You are right Grail and creeper, Dean and his cohorts at the DNC, although a necessary component to this action, are not smart enough to conjure up and plan this mammoth undertaking.

Let’s go to Obama’s years at Columbia University. Why is there such a secret about his transcript and the courses he took? Who were his instructors? Wonder of Wonders. At the same time of Obama’s attendance at Columbia, ZBIGNIEW BRZEZINSKI was also at the Columbia as head of the “Institute of Communist Affairs.” (More on ZB later.)

Obama’s senior thesis reportedly was entitled “Soviet Nuclear Disarmament.” His dissertation has disappeared from Columbia’s archives and the Obama campaign professes to have no copies of it. His degree, received in 1983, was in political science. Back to Brzezinski —

Brzezinski was national security adviser under Jimmy Carter. He left Columbia to found the TRILATERAL COMMISSION along with David Rockefeller. The Trilateral Commission is a private organization with members from the U.S., Europe and Japan. (The Japanese presence has grown to include other nations in Asia.)

In his book “Between Two Ages”, Brezezinski writes:

“Marxism is simultaneously a victory of the external, active man over the inner, passive man and a victory of reason over belief” (Page 72).  He called for a deliberate management of the American future (Page 260), a “Community of Nations” (page 296) and a “World Government” (Page 308).

He became the first director of the Trilateral Commission. He drafted it’s charter and became it’s strongest proponent. Some people believe this commission is an offshoot of the secret Bilderberg Group. (Perhaps more at a later time on this group.)
The funding for this enterprise came from the Charles F. Kettering Foundation, the Ford Foundation in addition to Rockefeller.

In July 1972, the first meeting of this group was called by David Rockefeller at his compound in Hudson Valley, N.Y. It was attended by 250 individuals who represented the elite of finance, media and industry. Other founding members were Alan Greenspan and Paul Volker – both eventually headed the Federal Reserve System.
Senator Barry Goldwater wrote in his book “With No Apologies”

“In my view, the Trilateral Commission represents a skillful, coordinated effort to seize the four centers of power: political, monetary, intellectual and ecclesiastical. All this to be done in the interest of creating a more peaceful, more productive world community. What the Trilateralists truly intend is the creation of a worldwide economic power superior to the political governments of the nation-states involved. They believe the abundant materialism they propose to create will overwhelm existing differences. As managers and creators of the system they will rule the future”

In 1977 Jeremiah Novak wrote in the July issue of the Atlantic – “Although the commission’s prime concern is economic, the Trilateralists pinpointed a vital political objective: to gain control of the American Presidency.

Craig S. Karpel wrote in a November 1977 Penthouse article – “Cartergate – The Trilateral Commission is the Carter Administration.”

(The Modern History Project quotes both Novak and Karpel.)

Carter appointed 26 former members of the commission to his administration.  Who knows what may have have happened if the electorate hadn’t dumped him after one term?

BRZEZINSKI AND OBAMA:
Brzezinski’s words on Obama – “What makes Obama attractive to me is that he understands that we live in a very different world where we have to relate to a variety of cultures and peoples.”

Some of the endorsers of Obama that have puzzled me as to the reason why:

  1. Jay Rockefeller of W. VA. …when the state went so overwhelmingly for Clinton.
  2. David Gergen.
  3. Fareed Zakaaria – Editor of Newsweek International, and TV commentator.
  4. Jimmy Carter – no puzzle there.

Could this be the the answer to the money, influence and brains behind the rapid rise of Obama?


Is this why his years in NY are blacked out?

Whom did he associate with in NY besides Brzezinski?
Will we ever have the answer?

Query: Were the inane mouthings of Joe Biden meant to tell us something?  Was he trying to clue us in that due to Brzezinski’s hatred of Russia there might be something instigated there?

Knowing Brzezinski’s volatile hatred of Russia, this scares the life out of me. As Obama’s foreign policy mentor for – how long? Back in his Columbia days? Now, for sure.)

Forgive this long diatribe, but it’s sure something to think about.

***

Additional information from InsightAnalytical-GRL:

Background on Brzezinksi from CNN’s “Knowledge Bank: Profiles here.

Excerpt:

Aiming to replace Kissinger’s “acrobatics” in foreign policy-making with a foreign policy “architecture,” Brzezinski was as eager for power as his rival. However, his task was complicated by his focus on East-West relations, and in a hawkish way — in an administration where many cared a great deal about North-South relations and human rights. …In the growing crisis atmosphere of 1979 and 1980 due to the Iranian hostage situation, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and a deepening economic crisis, Brzezinski’s anti-Soviet views gained influence but could not end the Carter administration’s malaise.

NOTE: Kissinger himself is reported to have told the head of state of Canada that Jimmy Carter is not the President of the United States. The Trilateral Commission is the President of the United States; I represent the Trilateral Commission.”

NOTE: Here is a link to a packet of information prepared by the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress which includes images of magazine and newspaper articles on the Trilateral Commission circa 1978-1980, as well as an extensive report listing the names of members at the time, its objectives, and a bibliography.