Damnit. I read this Max Boot piece praising the Obama team for their national security/foreign policy picks, and the first thing I did was race over to Larison’s to watch him knock it out of the park. Sadly, he has not yet commented.
I keep teasing you with a review of the Bacevich book, but in light of what is going on this week with Obama’s picks, it is just too depressing. Max Boot, btw, comes in for particular ridicule in the text, and I will review the book in a couple of days when the picks are done and announced. Let me at least pretend to be positive for now.
Finally, I note that there appears to have been some surprise by some about Gates staying on for Obama. Rather than discuss the merits of the pick, which can be saved for the actual confirmation (personally, I would like to know how he feels about the absolute nonsense we discussed yesterday), I would just like to say that if anyone was surprised by this, they simply have not been paying any attention at all.
While some picks genuinely surprised me (like, for example, Hillary at State), Obama asking Gates to stay has been telegraphed for weeks if not months, and for so long that I think I knew Gates would stay on before the election. The Gates/Scowcroft/Lugar/Obama connection has been discussed at length a number of places, most recently at TPM (and he has done a bang-up job chronicling all of this). As far as I have been concerned, the “bi-partisan” cabinet has always included Gates, and the only real question if it would be just Gates or Gates + one to prove “bi-partisanship.”
At any rate, if the Gates pick surprised you, you are in for a LONG four years of surprises.
DecidedFenceSitter
Plus, with everything else Obama will be trying to accomplish, does he really want to try and throw the Pentagon into a tizzy and learn the ropes with two wars going?
Look again in six months or a year and see if he is still around.
Dennis - SGMM
Boot:
WTF? What part of Obama will be President does Boot not understand? Gates is a competent, pragmatic, capable administrator. He will carry out Obama’s policies nothing less and nothing more. Boot is projecting his neocon wet dreams of endless war with Eastasia onto the wrong administration. As for the unconditional summits with dictators, I believe that falls to State and not to Defense.
tim
Obama = part of the Dem/Repub/military industrial complex axis of permanent power in the U.S.
Gates staying on is no surprise at all. Neither will be at least five more years in Iraq and more stupidity in Afghanistan. Same ol, same ol…
D. Mason
Ummmmmm, I’m pretty sure we’ve always been at war with Eurasia.
Dennis - SGMM
@D. Mason:
You’re right (Looks around) of course. A bit too much Victory Gin I guess.
Wapiti
Back in the primaries I held my nose and voted for Hillary because of the signals that Obama would use a Republican in DoD. I’m fine with Gates in the short-term (~2-3 years), but the Democratic Party needs to start growing some national security people.
Napoleon
It would not be possible to be a bigger fool then Max Boot. The fact that someone like him is published by newspapers and put on shows like Diane Rheems tells you everything about how screwed up our media is.
gwangung
He’s also not paying attention to Iraq, who agreed to SOFA, which IS A TIMETABLE. THEY want us out.
Only an ignorant idiot would think we’d be staying on in Iraq indefinitely.
Comrade Jake
Yeah, nobody should be surprised by this.
What I take issue with is the complaint that this choice helps cement the notion that Dems can’t do Defense. That is so fucking lame/brain dead.
liberal
@tim:
While IMHO we need to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan (if nothing else, we’re not going to be able to accomplish anything in either place, so might as well cut our losses), and while my own preference would be for Obama to put people who really were against the Iraq calamity from the outset in the highest places…
I would assume that a reading of history would show that it’s very difficult (in terms of domestic politics) for any country to disengage from a war, no matter how wrong the war is. If I had time, I’d do some research into the history of this, but I find it hard to believe it would be otherwise.
Not to mention that I don’t see how Iraq isn’t going to get a lot bloodier when we leave. (Not a reason for staying, since that will happen even if we stay 20 more years then leave, AFAICT.) Maybe if there was some grand bargain among countries in the region (including, most pointedly, Iran), but hard to see that happening no matter who’s in office.
cal hattrick
You write:
But NYT says Gates would not have to be reconfirmed. So no Q&A this time. Sorry.
The Other Steve
One of the things which strikes me funny, and I’m glad to see Obama is not falling for the trick.
I have seen a tendency as Republican policies turned bad, for the eventuality of someone coming along who would try to fix the problem. Gates or Patraeus, etc. Now if you look at these people and their history, and what they’ve articulated it is in complete opposition to everything the Republicans were arguing before they came along.
But the GOP is nothing but willing to jump on a bandwagon that looks like it might work. So suddenly they’re the biggest champions of these people because they want to be associated with a winner.
The problem for many Liberals is that they instant they see a Republican championing an idea or a person, suddenly they are totally against whatever that is, without much thinking as to why. Even if this was something they’d been arguing for for years. Solely because the GOP was now for it. I believe this is why this strategy has worked for the GOP for so long.
Obama doesn’t roll that way. He looks at the evidence, the facts, and decides if it is good on it’s own.
So you’ve got Max Boot here championing Gates. Whatever, the fuckwit was the biggest defender of Rumsfeld back in the day too.
Fred Kaplan over at slate has an interesting warning about Rumsfeld’s latest writing. He notes all kinds of incidents where Rumsfeld jumped on the bandwagon with a memo, and now he’s referencing that to say he was right all along. Kaplan warns this…
Sounds like what Max Boot is doing now, doesn’t it?
Atanarjuat
John Cole said:
Those surprised by the Great Redistributionist’s Jekyll & Hyde act are the spiral-eyed, hopey-changey suckers that PT Barnum waxed philosophical about.
Indeed, the Great Liberal Disillusionment, Acts I, II, and all the rest to follow are proving to be great entertainment and are likely boosting sales in popcorn at most warehouse club stores.
I love it.
-Country First.
Michael
What is with these neocons, the SOFA with Iraq requires us to leave by 2011. I worry about what the SOFA actually says since it is not available from our government- just a copy released on an Iraq site. I think that giving authority over our military actions is going to bite us in the backside. I believe that we need to pull out our troops and equipment starting in January.
torrentprime
I’ve got "The Limits of Power: The End of American Exceptionalism" on order now; I’m looking forward to the all-too-familiar feeling I get now when I read good books, that dual "Excellent read / dear god what happened to our country," similar to what happened to when I read "Fiasco." That book made me (start my journey and eventually) turn my back on the GOP. Wonder what this one will do.
What people like Boot (and apparently most of the right bloggers now) don’t seem to get, as they react with surprise and shock at the "sanity" and "centrism" of the Obama decisions on foreign policy picks, is that most of the Obama they were reacting to during the campaign was a caricature, a Free Republic, political-cartoon lefty-demon that bore little resemblance to reality. That Obama wasn’t going to react to facts on the ground before he pulled out of Iraq, that Obama wasn’t going to listen to intelligent, learned advisors before he sends troops somewhere (or, you know, not send them), that Obama was going to surrender America to the mullahs, and what not.
That they are surprised at all is a reflection of their swallowing GOP campaign tactics in the first place, not their openmindedness or Obama’s centrism.
Dennis - SGMM
@liberal:
I read that the military is claiming that it’s logistically impossible to leave Iraq in sixteen months. They may have a point: we’ve been pouring stuff into that country for five years.
torrentprime
Was @13 a parody? I can’t tell with the right anymore. Reading Palin defenders on the Web over the past few months has really burned out my satire detectors.
ThymeZone
All true. The GOP knows how to play this like a drum, too. Can you say FISA?
You also explained about half of the commentary on this blog.
Also your remark about the GOP wanting to get its picture taken with anything that says "success" on it, is pretty insightful.
All in all, a fine post. Exemplary.
ThymeZone
All spoof. "Country Crock" is pulling your tibia.
liberal
@Atanarjuat:
Again—why do you keep referring to Hank Paulson? Clearly OT.
Punchy
Somewhat said this yesterday, but it bears repeating — Cole’s Larison Love is bordering on clinical, and could very easily progress to stalking. Looking forward to a post in a few days describing Larison’s countertops and expressing rage that he appears to be in a committed, probably-hard-to-break-up relationship with someone else.
liberal
@Dennis – SGMM:
Some blogger or something made a counterpoint that, if you’re talking about taking out every reinforced blast wall we’ve installed, yes, it might take forever to get out.
But we don’t need to take all that stuff out with us. So it’s just a red herring.
Jim
After a middle class tax cut, something remotely approaching universal healthcare, and a whole lot of spending on alternative energy industries, I wonder if those thinking Obama has betrayed his backers will suddenly realize change indeed arrived.
liberal
@ThymeZone:
I’d like to see some enumerated examples.
Dork
Max Boot? New hightop from Nike?
ThymeZone
Ask the author, I didn’t write it.
I’d like to see $5 a pound swordfish, but I probably won’t ever again.
liberal
@Dork:
LOL!
Would that it were so…
ThymeZone
To be clear, my blockquote broke. The blurb you cited was part of the blockquote from Steve.
liberal
@ThymeZone:
Ah, Ye Olde Blockquote problem…
(yes, I posted that before your post appeared on my screen…now using the handy "OK, the ‘edit the post feature is cool but really could you fix the blockquote problem?’" feature)
NonyNony
The only question I had about the Gates pick was whether Gates would want to stay on or not. There was some talk that he was wanting to retire, so I figured that whether he stayed or went would be on his own shoulders. The fact that he was asked was completely unsurprising to me.
@Dennis – SGMM:
That quote from Boot seems really odd because – and I may be completely misremembering this and I’m not somewhere where I can adequately research it right now – I was under the impression that Gates was part of the Scowcroft faction of the GOP foreign policy wing NOT the neocon wing, and that while he hasn’t been actively moving to get out of Iraq that was mostly because the Secretary of Defense does what the President directs and the current President is a nitwit who has put a high priority on us staying in Iraq forever and using it as a base to go bomb the fuck out of whoever pissed us off in the Middle East – no matter how untenable that plan actually is in reality.
Regardless of all that, if Gates is taking the job then I suspect that he will … do what the next President wants. If Obama puts a high priority on extricating the US from Iraq and shifting forces to Afghanistan, his Secretary of Defense is going to put a high priority on extricating the US from Iraq and shifting forces to Afghanistan. He wouldn’t take the job if he wasn’t on board with the President’s agenda – especially given that he only took the job in the first place because our military apparatus was well and truly fucked because of the President and the previous holder of the office and he felt it was his duty when asked to come in and fix it.
Cassidy
To Gates credit, he has spearheaded the change in Army culture where it okay to seek mental health counseling from war related issues. The Army is trying to change.
ThymeZone
No prob, liberal.
And I’d settle for decent $10 a pound swordfish.
joe from Lowell
Boot has it exactly backwards. The liberals won the Iraq debate.
There is now a broad consensus about what to do next that spans party lines. Everyone from the center-right through the Democratic left is on the same page – get out of Iraq over the next couple of years, no permanent bases there to "project force," Iraq isn’t going to be a satellite, strike a deal with Iran, refocus on Afghanistan and the Middle East peace process.
It’s just the people like Boot, and the Ron Paul/Dennis Kucinich isolationists, who dissent from that vision of the next couple of years.
Dork
If you think our military is going to actually fulfill these obligations and obey this agreement, I’ve got a dime-bag of the good stuff to augment whatever you’re currently toking.
Atanarjuat
I just saw the Great Redistributionist being taken to task by CNN’s Ed Henry about that whole "change" message not squaring with the cabinet picks so far. Predictably, Obama got defensive and lamely tried to pass off James Volcker as someone who’s not a Washington insider and will somehow bring "fresh" ideas.
After Obama hedged and fidgeted around Ed Henry’s incisive questions (what’s known as journalism, something you liberals better get used to), he abruptly departed while muttering something incoherent about turkey recipes or somesuch.
How easily the Great Redistributionist buckles under the slightest amount of inquiry. It is to laugh.
-Country First.
Dennis - SGMM
@liberal:
You have a point. When my outfit left Vietnam we shipped out weapons and ordnance, all of the aircraft, and little else. We gave our vehicles to the Vietnamese military. We were ordered to dispose of everything smaller because it was more expensive to ship it back than it was to replace it. So, we just loaded all of our handtools, furniture, rations, appliances, everything disposable and non-lethal, onto trucks and we then made several trips in our last days there to local towns and villages and just gave the stuff to the Vietnamese. The alternative was to dump everything into the Mekong. Our CO winked at the whole operation. Don’t know if the troops in Iraq could or would be able to do the same. If so, then sixteen months should be plenty. Moreover, we’re going to have to leave a few brigades for training and logistics support for an indeterminate amount of time so not everything has to go at once.
srv
You’re buttons aren’t working again, so by hand:
Not sure what to make of that. Sounds like what a progressive would say after reading it.
One thing from Bacevich’s talk – someone asked if he had any contacts in the Obama campaign. He laughed and said no. The two-star USMC general hosting said "We have to find you a voice there". Given that Col. Nagl is apparently one of the players in Obama’s orbit, I don’t see that happening. Nagl is pretty much the exact opposite of Bacevich – he wants to build an Army focused on COIN/Phase IV occupations.
From that Mark Perry article Larison linked to:
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/JK25Ak01.html
Mighty swell that. That should all be going south about the time Patraeus is looking at 2012. It also talks in detail about the Nagl vs Gentile war – whether the Army should be a counter-insurgency or big war one.
Also, the folks running Afghanistan are pretty bleak:
So I’m not sure what more troops are going to do there but bring Pakistan down sooner. Sounds like another real winner to me.
If the bquotes don’t work, not my fault.
JR
The problem for many Liberals is that they instant they see a Republican championing an idea or a person, suddenly they are totally against whatever that is, without much thinking as to why.
Just another lie. You have no idea what this Progressive Liberal thinks.
I am very bored of being told by loudmouth asses what my positions are as a Liberal, because these asses simply don’t know. They have no clue. Self-serving strawman lies by "conservatives" are no more accurate than any other of their stupid, endlessly repeated lies.
I have come to my conclusions about Republicans over time through observation. If a Republican has a good idea I would be very happy to hear it, but since you haven’t realized this I’ll tell you: Republicans are not what they say they are. Republican conservatives are not fiscally conservative, or pro-family, or remotely Christian, or strong on defense, or capable of ever taking any hint of responsibility for any damn thing they ever do. What they are is an accomplished set of professional liars who enjoy fantasizing about suffering of people they don’t "like".
By and large what comes from the mouth of a Con is what their think-tanks and their bought media put there. The problem then becomes that Cons talk and blather and scream and bitch about things they have no idea about. The prosperous LIBERAL era ushered in by the Greatest Generation allowed many "Conservatives" a peculiar entitlement feeling of being able to talk out their ass without consequence, and it has been instructive to watch.
As for Obama, I support him because he talks like the old-style Liberals, which have largely been supplanted by faux-liberal types in our media and politics. If you think I am somehow disappointed that some "far Left" proposals have not been made, it is because you think that Liberal = Leftists. That is your ugly mistake: the same one both the commies and the fascists made.
They found out different. So will the current crop of Cons.
Peace.
The Other Steve
I can point you to dailyKos, if you are not familiar with the internet traditions.
John Cole
@Punchy: I just think Larison is one of the more interesting voices out there. He has some fun views on some things (I wish some of you would check his archives for his opinions on monarchy), and is just a good daily read.
The Other Steve
Was I talking about you?
Actually come to think about it, you did respond in a totally predictable manner. :-)
joe from Lowell
Atanarjurat,
Oddly enough, I don’t have a contrasting story about any Republicans being asked serious questions about the direction and style of how they’re going to govern the country.
Why do you think that is?
Oh. Right. Regional party, fringe cult, Sarah Palin…I forget.
liberal
@The Other Steve:
I was thinking more in terms of office holders, or prominent analysts.
I’m sure you can find some idiot of any given ideological persuasion saying any given stupid thing on the internet.
liberal
@srv:
I love Bacevich, but his take on things is way beyond what the establishment can tolerate.
joe from Lowell
I am very bored of being told by loudmouth asses what my positions are as a Liberal, because these asses simply don’t know. They have no clue. Self-serving strawman lies by "conservatives" are no more accurate than any other of their stupid, endlessly repeated lies.
QFT. I find that conservatives are almost always completely unfamiliar with actual liberal ideas and arguments, since they don’t bother to actually listen to or read what liberals have to say. Rather, they read what Rich Lowry or Rush Limbaugh present as the liberals’ arguments, but which are actually just strawmen they prop up in order to rank on the liberals.
You can see this most clearly in the runup to the Iraq War. There were actual arguments made by liberals about the weakness of the WMD case, the probability of a civil war, the Iraqis’ being unlikely to accept an occupation, the lack of al Qaeda links, and on and on – but the conservatives didn’t have any counterarguments. Their eyes would glaze over as soon as they realized it was an anti-invasion argument, and when the liberal finished, they’d respond by rebutting some argument that was never made, usually involving appeasement, the existence of evil in the world, or the capacity of Muslims to live in a democracy.
Napoleon
Something just occurred to me, if Gates gets the DOD gig from Obama and he happens to write a memoir sometime in the future, could you imagine the difference he will be able to describe in dealing with Bush vs. dealing with Obama?
JR
Umm … "The Other Steve":
My response was not what you predicted, of course, or you would have had an answer.
Instead we get to hear you lie, insult, and make a lame attempt at "snarky" humor. You know, Con talk.
Comrade Jake
@Atanarjuat:
This is rich, particularly coming from the genius who guaranteed a McCain victory. Your foresight leaves something to be desired, to say the least.
Hedley Lamarr
"At any rate, if the Gates pick surprised you, you are in for a LONG four years of surprises."
Yes, like Dana Perino becoming undersecretary of State.
JR
Joe from Lowell –
Agreed. It has been very helpful to the Republican "leadership" that their rank and file conservative followers accept lies whole if they are peppered well with hatred and derision.
Right now the Liberal = Leftist lie is in danger from Obama actually being quite moderate. So the new "talking point" is that the progressive liberal base (ie, us wild-eyed radical leftists) is being marginalized and are up in arms in fury that Obama is "reaching out to Republicans."
In fact the only upset ones are the Cons. Funny how that works. The consistency of the lying, I mean.
Christianity, national defense, the economy and our national heritage are basically mirror images of the way the Cons tell it.
TenguPhule
Yes, that would be one of the times that TZ got it so wrong that it threatened to overtake the wrongness generated by the GOP graviational field of stupid.
FISA was a dumb Obama vote.
CIRCVS MAXIMVS MMVIII
Iraq was bloody before we arrived, all we did was agitate the environment quite effectively. Iraq will be bloody when we leave, and it won’t be completely our fault. Those people have been fighting for many, many years. The idea that we’re supposed to leave it bloodless when we leave is lunacy. Of course we created some of that blood-letting, but we weren’t totally responsible for it.
CIRCVS MAXIMVS MMVIII
@Comrade Jake:
True that. Even his hindsight is compromised.
empty
Here is an interview with Bacevich at ThinkProgress. Boy, what I wouldn’t give to have him as secdef.
CIRCVS MAXIMVS MMVIII
@JR:
Um, excuse me for asking, but this is different from how the rest of us see this situation HOW exactly? You described exactly what I see and it’s not big secret here, so yes, stating your response was predicatable was absolutely correct. You think you’re the only one who sees these things? Not even close!
TheHatOnMyCat
No, absolutely not. Nothing Obama does can be argued to be dumb just because you don’t agree with it. That makes you look dumb, which of course, you are. And he doesn’t look dumb because, as anyone can see, he is not. So that issue is settled.
But for true dumb, you have the real dumbitude I was talking about, not the aspect that you dumbly and wrongly talk about. That aspect is that people here insisted that they would vote for McCain because of the Obama FISA vote.
That level of dumb cannot be fucked with, this is bone dumb, and tragic dumb. Imagine, McCain as your choice for president, because you (rhetorical you, not you specifically) disagree with Obama’s FISA vote.
For my money, it doesn’t get much dumber than that.
What I said then, and say now, is that the FISA vote just didn’t matter in that time and context. I was right then and I am still right about it. Nobody gives a fuck about that vote now, and they won’t even remember it six months from now.
What mattered then, and matters now, was that we elect Obama president, and begin the long and tedious process of repairing damage on many fronts. Not understanding that and staying focussed on it was dumb then, and remains dumb now.
You sir are swimming in a lake of dumb. You are the poster boy of dumb. You are epic dumb. You are so dumb, you make ordinary dumb look like Einstein.
HyperIon
i bet that’s what some thought after hearing Carter’s malaise speech. plus ca change…
srv
You must be exhausted every day fighting all these strawmen.
Can somebody whip up a TZ-to-Rocky IV translator greasemonkey script?
TheHatOnMyCat
Well, I remember the time pretty well. I remember exactly where I was, in fact, listening to the speech on car radio.
My impression then was that people mostly thought, it’s the middle of summer, there is an energy mess we don’t really understand and weren’t prepared for, and this whiny fuckhead is telling us it’s our fault because we haven’t been wearing our sweaters.
Carter was an epic fail communicator. His failure at it is what made Reagan seem like the Great Communicator.
Remember, it was July, and he was telling people to turn down the heat and wear sweaters. And stop consuming energy so much.
It was masterful, really. SNL couldn’t have done it better.
TheHatOnMyCat
All these years here, and projection is still all you got?
Fuck, man. Get some new material for crissakes.
TenguPhule
If you’re going to borrow a jackalope of tautology from Paul L, TZ, at least give the poor little thing a fighting chance.
Obama’s vote on FISA was dumb. He didn’t have to vote for it, his base didn’t like it and it only served to give Democrats a share of the blame for Republican crimes.
Jeff
This will get some Republicans back in a tizzy:
Thank goodness competence and common sense are coming back.
TenguPhule
It was a stupid vote.
If it didn’t matter, why did he vote for it? Why do you overreact whenever it’s brought up?
It’s like trying to excuse Hillary’s vote on Iraq. It was a stupid vote and it came back to haunt her later.
If it was going to pass anyway, why not vote against it to ensure at least that the fallout would not be on his shoulders?
Tony J
One thing about keeping Gates on at Defence that I haven’t seen mentioned before is the block it puts on any last minute grandstanding from the outgoing Administration. By which I mean Cheney and his Dogs o’ War.
Put it this way. Gates is a long-time Bush-Senior loyalist who once upon a time oversaw a purge of CIA analyists unwilling to lie about the Soviet Union’s military strength and political weakness back in the era of the ‘Evil Empire’. He’s a genuinely nasty piece of work, no arguments here.
But he’s in the Cabinet basically to serve as Bush-Senior’s avatar and stop Bush-Junior from screwing up any more than he absolutely insists on. And it’s going to be really, really hard to get Gates to foul his own nest more than it already is by asking him to sign off on something designed primarily to embarass Obama.
So as political ju-jitsu, it’s an understandable move. Any counter-move by the neo-cons will have to try to work around Gates, which won’t be easy to do.
TheHatOnMyCat
That’s your opinion. I don’t share it.
We’ll have to agree to disagree. I seriously doubt that Mr. Obama makes "dumb" decisions, even if I may disagree with some of them.
My choice here is to think that either he makes dumb decisions, or that you say really, really dumb things. I think you know which way I am leaning on that one. Any reasonable person would have to conclude that B, or 2, is the correct choice here.
I have noted that you think Mr. Obama made a "dumb" decision. Just in case I am ever tempted to take anything you say without a large crystal or two of water softener salt.
Large, like walnut sized. Big. A choker.
TheHatOnMyCat
Is that one question, or two?
On the first question, he stated why he voted for it at the time. You can look that up, and if you have further questions, you can address them to him.
On the second, or part two, fuck off you complete asshole. Defending a position is what it is. If you have an argument, make it, but don’t sit here and jerk off with "overreacting" crap. Why are you overreacting to my reaction?
You are wrong on this, just as you were then, and for the same reasons.
As for "his base didn’t like it," the last time I looked he won the election by NINE MILLION VOTES.
Yeah, the man just does dumb things. You, on the other hand …. one brilliant thing after another.
TheHatOnMyCat
I think you are confusing FISA with a dandruff shampoo commercial.
srv
John, Larison has replied:
http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2008/11/26/no-surprises-here-3/
The Grand Panjandrum
Larison did indeed take a swing at that softball you lobbed him. I’m not quite sure why, but Larison almost always makes me laugh. Maybe I’m reading something into the tone of his writing but I do get a good chuckle out of his criticism.
Ouch!
Atanarjuat
Ah, yes, the FISA Amendments Act of 2008. The Great Redistributionist’s yea vote on that bill should have given all his swooning supporters a fair warning as to the chameleon-like opportunism that Obama would endeavor in his upcoming administration, but the few voices in the wilderness that expressed concern (Greenwald, for one) were drowned out by the Lockstep Liberal Hive Mind.
But don’t bring up the FISA vote too often around conservative-free bastions of knee-jerk liberalism (i.e., Daily Kos, Balloon Juice), or you’ll get a deafening shout of, "JUST SHUT UP!" in response.
By the way, I like this bit from CIRCVS MAXIMVS MMVIII:
Yeah, "those people."
The people of Iraq were suffering under the unrelenting cruelty of the Saddam Hussein regime, but to card-carrying members of the Liberal Hive Mind, Middle Easteners are not really worthy of a safe, free, comfortable life, much less human rights. They’re simply "those people." A bunch of distant foreigners in the abstract, and dismissed just as blithely by the elitist snobs of the left.
However, I suspect that liberals wouldn’t turn their nose up at Iraq if it were Bill Clinton who’d invaded, or, had Gore won in 2000, he’d be the one to initiate hostilities against an evil Mideast tyrant. But you know how it goes, liberals = good, conservatives = bad, so Bush had no business whatsoever trying to do anything for those semitic untermenschen that leftists like CIRCVS couldn’t care less about.
Anyway, back to popcorn munching while the Great Obama Betrayal continues among the liberal rabble.
-Country First.
Blue Raven
Jaysus, could the trolls BE more boring today?
TheHatOnMyCat
According to my high school creative writing class almost fifty years ago, a reliable signature of insincerity and lack of writing talent was continual overuse of adjectives. Er, I mean the swooning and chameleon-like overuse of adjectives.
Let’s see if I have this right. Obama annoys his "base" and wins by almost nine million votes. Tengu Phule criticizes him. You, the Country Crock spoof, call him a chameleon.
Wow, this is like watching faux wrestling on tv. Is it the "hit" he took from annoying his base, or the huge pile of votes he ended up with, that are worthy of scorn now? Which of you two geniuses has it right?
This is gonna take a while to dee-cipher.
I’ll need my Magic Eight Ball to handle this one.
TheHatOnMyCat
Well, you could always ask John to start a thread on the best salt and pepper to use in crockpot cooking.
I mean, if you can stand the excitement.
Atanarjuat
TheHatOnMyCat said:
Perhaps this famous quote by H. L. Mencken will help you with your confusion.
"No one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American public."
You’re welcome, Nutcutter.
-Country First.
TheHatOnMyCat
How many votes did Mencken win by? I forget.
Heh. Back atcha ;-)
liberal
@Atanarjuat:
LOL!
No, we elitist liberal snobs just have a—shall I say it?—Burkean understanding of the realities of human nature. To wit, we don’t think "those people" are like that; we think "all people" are like that. Europe, after all, was involved in a series of murderous wars that often revolved around religion—for centuries.
And given that we’re in the Reality Based Community, we look at the data and understand that matters aren’t improved by Iraq’s history of weak (albeit oftentimes totalitarian) governance and its pluralistic, multicultural and multiethnic nature. (Just more excuses for people to murder each other.)
In short, this isn’t a matter of "ought." It’s a matter of "is". To wit, nation building in this context by a foreign power is extremely unlikely to be successful. Period.
CIRCVS MAXIMVS MMVIII
Wrong. People are people everywhere, I simply don’t think Americans have any business going around telling others how to act and policing their actions.
Atan, you’re still an asshole.
Moreover, I turn my nose up at America starting wars wherever I see them occurring, no matter WHO is at the helm of the office of the United States.
CIRCVS MAXIMVS MMVIII
Actually, the White Man People (and I am caucasian myself) are not people to be proud of, we have this annoying tendency to believe our war-making is correct where all other war-making isn’t, and since we have (or had) an advanced country with an advanced military, we decided it was our job to go around using a stick to make the rest of the world exactly like us. We are the biggest of hypocrites.
CIRCVS MAXIMVS MMVIII
Oh, btw, Atan… you’re the one who supports war, and the "those people" argument you made on me is actually just a projection of yourself. Admit it.
I don’t like war no matter WHO is fighting it.
demimondian
@TheHatOnMyCat:
Your creative writing teacher was right almost fifty years ago. However, since neither swooning nor chameleon-like are adjectives, I don’t see what it has to do with the passage you quoted…
TenguPhule
You can disagree with things a person does and still vote for them. TZ, your problem is you confuse legitimate criticism with something that drives you insane.
It was a bad vote, it set a bad precedent and your defense is "it doesn’t matter".
Tattoosydney
@demimondian:
Excuse me if I am wrong, but isn’t the word "swooning" in the phrase "swooning supporters" an adjective, in that it modifies the noun, giving more information about the noun?
"Swooning" is not being used in its verb form ("The supporters were swooning."), but adjectivally ("They are swooning supporters".)
Similarly, "chameleon-like" opportunism….