Powered by TypePad

« McCain Bombs Barack Without Permission | Main | The Times' McCain Scandal - Sex Or Ethics? »

February 20, 2008

Comments

Pofarmer

Another shining example of right wing morality.

Yes, because disclosing SEALED court documents, that neither party wants opened, is obviously the moral thing to do.

MayBee

his wife, by her own admission, can't remember what happened last week.

This compassion for a woman with short-term memory loss due to a stroke is overwhelming. You guys never disappoint.

TMF

"His resume weakness is a mindless talking point. It doesn't move too many needles."

Amongst partisan Democrats it doesnt

Amongst the majority of voters come November- I assure you my Soviet friend, it WILL

Other Tom

"I am flattered to have earned enough of a reputation for open-mindedness to elicit this (apparently?) sincere question."

Why "apparently?"

And why do you believe that the question confers on you a reputation for open-mindedness?

Sue

This country is run by a civilian. It was designed that way. The proto-authoritarians are afraid of letting a non-military man run the country, but most voters don't buy it.

How funny. When Kerry was running the argument was just the opposite.

Anon

Soylent Red-

Sorry dude...

And I happen to know you are one of the military brethren...

Jeebus-just imagine the "sensitivity" training with His Oneness-in -Chief...


DMZ or that?

DMZ please!


Pofarmer

he's been a law professor, a community organizer, and a legislator.

Might qualify him to be on the board of some non-profit something or other.

glasnost

Seriously, folx. Tom, you like evidentiary-based questions, don't you? Has, or has not, Hillary Clinton been slagging away at the 'no experience' hot button for months? How's that working out for her? Have you seen the way Barack Obama has picked up independents? Those are your swing voters.

So you think when John McCain does it, it will be different... somehow.

Can you enunciate a specific reason for that?

TMF

Resume weakness is a mindless talking point if youve never had to hire someone

TMF

"community organizer"

LOL

Translation- professional wannabe

Cecil Turner

No, I'm not, which is why I think "Obama is no more ready than Bush was" could be potent . . .

Nice try. Obama is "no more ready" than any random peacenik protester . . . he certainly doesn't compare with anyone who's been a commissioned officer in any service (or Guard component thereof). He's "far less ready" than Bush was. So now our (largely mythical) "independent" voters have to decide if that's acceptable.

Sue

Can you enunciate a specific reason for that?

Uh, yeah. Hillary has no experience either. Plus she runs about 49% unfavorable ratings.

TMF

"So you think when John McCain does it, it will be different... somehow.

Can you enunciate a specific reason for that"

When the GOP does it it will be to a general election electorate

Very, very different from an activist partisan primary electorate

Ask President Dukakis

TMF

Ask Senator Lamont

clarice

As an aside, didja notice--protein wisdom reports Truthout has let its crack reporter Jason Leopold go, insisting all the while it is not because of his false report that Rove had been indicted.

centralcal

I am in California, and the moon is just now turning peachy pink, not totally eclipsed and orange yet. Light cloud cover (we had rain today), but still fully visible.

Okay, you may now return to your normal posting. Ha!

TMF

Ask President Kerry and Vice President Edwards

Other Tom

"McCain is a crotchedy, cantankerous 72-year-old..."

Ronald Reagan carried 49 states at the age of 73. And McCain is 71, not 72. Might as well get your facts straight, even if your judgment is infantile.

centralcal

Wow, Clarice! No more Jason Leopold! Whatever will we do, now? D'ya think he went undercover?

Lawnguylander

How funny. When Kerry was running the argument was just the opposite.

You're right. The authoritarians were not concerned at all with Bush's lesser military experience. And now that McCain is running?

Anon

Someone capable of channeling spirt with such intensity that he can inspire us to go far beyond our selves in the service of Mankind, and all creatures great and small with whom we share this planet.

Cripes did they really say "channeling spirt"?

Look at all this benovelence he is inspiring in the Loverly Lesley and this troll making fun of Cindy McCain's health condition...

My gawd-next he'll calim he can keep polar ice caps from melting-while at the same time lowering your gas prices!

Wait! He already did it!

Yes-you might have slept through it given that he made history last night with the longest victory speech-where he made that promise.

TMF

Kerry rode in a boat for about 3 months in Nam

Cant exactly call that impressive military experience

Other Tom

Kerry's problem was that he lied about his experience. Bush won because he didn't lie.

I think we're witnessing a celestial event of some kind. Every time there's a lunar eclipse, a coterie of Moonbats shows up here. They come unencumbered by fact or reason, promptly get humiliated by the regulars, and disappear as promptly as a meteor shower.

Tomorrow night we'll see a waning gibbous moon, and these stupes will be gone.

Jane

he's been a law professor, a community organizer, and a legislator

Gee, from what I've seen most of the regular posters here have more qualifications than that.

But hey, I stand in awe.

clarice

I suspect the secret mistress story is inconsistnet with the too old theme, but if it floats your boats.......

Cecil Turner

Ronald Reagan's foreign policy experience was what? Remind me again? Oh, that's right, it was nothing.

The qualification is for "Commander in Chief" not "foreign policy guru." Reagan was a reserve enlisted man, cavalry officer, wartime logistics officer, and finally supervised making armed forces training films. Two terms of CA Governor (head of the national guard). About average. Not going to plan a major operation by himself, but at least you don't have to teach him the difference between a Fleet Admiral and a Lance Corporal. Compare that with Obama's . . . well, nothing. Great example.

Sue

Well, really, how much experience do you need to surrender? Not much, I would imagine. However, Obama's camp is now saying his out by 2009 is just a goal, not a promise.

Other Tom

Cecil, you obviously don't have a sense of what it takes to be a community organizer.

RichatUF

cleo-

... think it's because you wish to give Bush a pass on foreign policy acumen...

Get the memo to Bob Geldof

More failure here

An interesting question, if Bush has been a failure in foreign policy, then why has there been a surge in international economic growth [haven't parsed out the numbers but I think globally trade as %global gdp has finally recovered and surpassed the high-water mark set in the 1880's]?

Also, since BHO is committed to change, would he reduce US and international trade, thereby reducing global income?

Don

Obama is inexperienced? Tough titty. The guy's going to win the Presidency. Bush, warrior that he is, has a 19% approval in the latest ARG poll.

Maguire-what's the last prediction you made that you got right?

Obama speaks in code

It would be extraordinarily easy for someone to force Obama out of the race simply by asking him a series of pointed questions about his past statements and actions and his current proposals. Obama's response could be videotaped and uploaded and a few hundred thousand views later he wouldn't have much of a career left.

You could start with asking him who he's speaking code to (see my name's link), but the main course code be asking him about this or asking him to explain exactly how immigration "reform" is going to work: tinyurl.com/2k8btl

The preceding, of course, assumes that the questioner is familiar with the topics being asked about and has experience forcefully demanding an answer.

But, even if that's not you just go to one of his appearances and ask him about the issue and then upload it. Unfortunately, not too many people seem capable of doing that.

glasnost

Reagan was a reserve enlisted man, cavalry officer, wartime logistics officer,

Looks like I picked a bad example. I stand corrected. Score one for you, etc.

Let's use another example to make the same point: Bill Clinton. Sure, you can all convince each other that the guy ran a terrible foreign policy, etc, but he was elected - and then re-elected - despite having no foreign policy experience. He left office with an approval rating of 65%. The point here is that the data demonstrates that your opinions have very little predictive value on America's opinion.

You may think it's the end of the world that Barack Obama has less foreign-policy experience than John McCain, but Bill Clinton's example makes it pretty clear that ordinary voters don't necessarily care.

While we're at it... Mitt Romney's FP experience? Rudolph Guiliani's? Mike Huckabee's? Did John McCain really beat those guys because of his veteran-ness? Is that the whole story? I doubt it. Quite a lot, in fact.

Foo Bar

But isn't it potent when you think about it in your own head?
Why do you have to be in a discussion with a Republican to ponder it?

It has a certain potency on its own, but it's more compelling if you hear it from someone not naturally inclined to concede it, which would imply that the truth of the claim seems so undeniable that even a former (current?) Bush supporter is forced to acknowledge it.

Sue

Obama is inexperienced? Tough titty. The guy's going to win the Presidency. Bush, warrior that he is, has a 19% approval in the latest ARG poll.

Damn. Obama might just beat Bush then.

On a different note, reckon ole Huckster knew this story was coming and stayed in the race this long waiting for it?

Don

Sue-of course Huckabee knew about this story. It was on the Drudge Report in December!

And I'm sure the NYT held back some juicy stuff.

sbw

The secret mistress for a 71-year-old reminds me of the old joke that "I'm not as good as I once was, but I'm as good once as I ever was!"

No traction on this smear.

Don

They did endorse the guy after all.

Anon

RichatUF-

These are the most selfish bunch of pikers.

It's all about them

Do you think for one minute they give a rat's ass about responsibility?

Responsibility on the global scale?

It's all about them and their wants and needs and Obama is willing to bribe these ugly hearts to the nines.

Do you think for one minute he mentions-Rwanda? Darfur? Saddam's evil? Kenya even?

Ironic.

Nope-um he's on record as saying that he wants to pull out of Iraq in less than six months.

The six month deadline isn't even his own idea-that's Hillary's.

RichatUF

Sue-

I'm getting to the thread late, but: And you support a policy that takes us back to the days of Clinton's policy of fighting terrorists in the court system.

Bill Clinton freed more terrorists with pardons than he could be bothered to jail. A cheap shot, I know, but I really can't believe that BHO would want to get into a debate that it would be better to have FSO's passing out matchbooks with pictures of wanted terrorists [Rewards for Justice v.1; Yousef; guest in Florence CO] to try them in the SDNY, than killing them with JDAMS [USAF; Zarqawi; dead-in Hell, 8th Circle] or Hellfire [USAF{?}; Atef; dead-in Hell, 8th Circle].

I've got my problems with McCain as the nominee, but I'm sure that is a debate he can win.

hrtshpdbox

"The NYTs can be a bit....premature...in their excitement to take down a Republican."
Not to change the subject, but I'm sure that Mike Huckabee is thinking the Times is in fact a bit belated.

Anon

It's reminding me of-

McGovern Redux.

Peace at any Cost was his motto-coupled with a $1,000 for everyone from the "public"[no they didn't get where this would come form] treasury-and hell-

A Chicken in Every Pot!

Or was it pot for every chicken?

Anyoo-that worked out well for them I think McGovern only won two states.

Massachusetts-and maybe DC or Maryland?

sbw

I've solidified how I feel about Democrats whose rhetorical efforts on comment threads are based not on reaching understanding, but rather on owning (pwning).

On the whole blogging Democrats seem to be a class of people petulant enough to think they can afford to stop learning.

bgates

Between his contempt for immigration law, the First Amendment, and (since I'm a conservative) me personally, I didn't see how McCain could possibly convince me to vote for him. Turns out he didn't need to - Michelle Obama and today's commenters are (ha!) doing the job Republican presidential candidates won't do.

re the NYT hit piece - last time Republicans nominated an old war hero, he didn't start doing Viagra ads until after the election.

Pofarmer

The secret mistress for a 71-year-old reminds me of the old joke that "I'm not as good as I once was, but I'm as good once as I ever was!"

No traction on this smear.

I agree. At his age it's more of feature than a bug.

Bill in AZ

Wonder what's coming down that caused NYT to prematurely start pounding on McCain. I figured they would wait until most of MSM had centered on Obama. Maybe the townhouse memo came out this afternoon that they have all agreed, but it still seems early - unless they have 8 months worth of bombs to drop on McCain, which isn't outside the realm of possibility. But 8 months of Obamessiah worship?? even hardcore libs will have a hard time with that.

Don/pete/martin - wondered where you dragged your goalposts to... Are you Lesley too? You forgot chemtrails in your loony screed above.

Rick Ballard

Sue,

I'm not concerned at all with the New York Dungheap's pattycake revelations of old stories. I'm a bit more concerned about BHO the Red's access to records (probably exquisitely doctored) that we can all rest assured will be provided to him by Commie buddies from Vietnam.

The Commie's have always been really good mixing disinformation and agitprop and I believe that people should really consider what it took to get those divorce records unsealed in order to boost BHO in his first efforts. He's a slimeball with the full backing of the American Communist Lawyers Union - including every pink to red judge sitting on the bench at the moment.

That's the part that won't be much fun.

Cecil Turner

Let's use another example to make the same point: Bill Clinton.

12 years as Governor (again, head of Guard). His first term in particular involved extensive operational issues involving the Mariel Boatlift (escapees). And though it's not the focus of day to day Gov duties, it's probably the closest to being overall commander. Moreover, Clinton was one of the worst-qualified national defense presidents ever elected . . . many think it showed. And Obama still ain't close.

Other Tom

ARG has Bush approval at 19%? Last ARG poll I saw had Hillary up five in Wisconsin...

And Zogby today has Bush at 34, congress at 17.

How many community organizers do you know? What does a community organizer do? Who pays him, and for what?

Don

Too Rich! NYT: "Both (Republican former aides) said Mr. McCain acknowledged behaving inappropriately."

And Lowry wants to know "What does "behaving inappropriately" mean?"

Cub Scout. Well, McCain has denied a "romantic" relationship, so obviously it was just wild monkey sex. And I love that the woman got a lawyer back in December. Yep.Nothing to see here.

Don

You trash ARG and tout Zogby? Whatever. 34 is the best you got? That's still pathetic.

glasnost

12 years as Governor (again, head of Guard). His first term in particular involved extensive operational issues involving the Mariel Boatlift (escapees). And though it's not the focus of day to day Gov duties, it's probably the closest to being overall commander

Very thin. Not much in there about actual foreign policy, much less wartime issues.

Moreover, Clinton was one of the worst-qualified national defense presidents ever elected . . . many think it showed.

I'm quite sure this doesn't stand up to analysis over any period larger than 1945-now. Frankly, the string of ex-veterans post WWII was a fluke, a product of the very large percentage of US males in the military at that time. The fluke is ending, as Bill Clinton and Bush III make clear.

As for "many think it showed" - I suggest you look at the 65% approval rating. The question is: will this be an effective attack line? Against Bill Clinton it wasn't.
I wasn't hugely impressed with Bill's policy in 1993-4, but the country wasn't exactly fatally wounded.

If you think that governor of Arkansas is a serious foreign policy job in a way that being a US Senator on the Foreign Relations Committee for four years is not, you can push that... but I think in the real world, Barack probably has *more* foreign policy experience from those four years than Bill Clinton. Moreover, I'm still looking for a data point as to... why you have a reason to think the voters will care.

RichatUF

Anon-

Nope-um he's on record as saying that he wants to pull out of Iraq in less than six months.

I haven't heard that he put a timeline on it, just a nebulous year [end of 09?]. He has also commented more than once on the Darfur genocide-no one has pinned him down which US forces and what role he would support to end the killing. Would he be willing to commit say a elements of the 173rd or 10 Mtn under a French-UN command structure to Chad and launch attacks against the janjaweed and Sudanese military formations? [Doubtful...]

What is his plan when the peace treaty in the south collapases and the Chinese re-enforce their positions and arm the Sudanese and j.? [He is probably unaware that the hunda expires late 2008 and the janjaweed are stepping up their western offensive to outflank the southern militias in time for Christmas]

Would he support the Clinton option of hiring out Executive Outcomes [or Blackwater] and encourage a "lift and strike"? [Doubtful again; what the only thing that will help in Darfur are guns and training?-a prog would never think of such a heresy]

I'm sure Samantha Powers has got this all figured out-the fantasy thinking on Iraq makes my teeth grind-

Puff the Magical Obama-at least his speeches make us think of rainbows

jlo

This comment thread is like the written equivalent of a death rattle.

My favorite stuff:

"There are morons, and then there are morons. You fit the latter category."

Posted by: Sue | February 20, 2008 at 09:45 PM

Umm - Sue? Your sarcasm is soaking in (unintentional) irony, very confusing to the reader.
============================
That's some weapons-grade crazytalk, Leslie.

Nicely regurgitated from the SN! crowd, though. Nicely regurgitated - apparently you did not even partially digest it.

Or, demonstrably, did you pay attention during the past seven years.

-

Posted by: BumperStickerist | February 20, 2008 at 09:45 PM

Hey Bumper! Nice way to wholly dodge any of Lesley's points and go right to the ad hominem attack. At least when SN! gives you the once-over, they take a moment to show why they you're an idiot. It's called substance.
================================
his wife, by her own admission, can't remember what happened last week.

This compassion for a woman with short-term memory loss due to a stroke is overwhelming. You guys never disappoint.

Posted by: MayBee | February 20, 2008 at 10:11 PM

Hello MayBee - compassion is irrelevant when stating an admission. If the woman said it, then repeating it does not make one non-compassionate. By your standard, attacking Michelle Obama for her comments yesterday would lack compassion.
===================================
But wait, I saved the best for last:

Sorry. Since he cannot run again, he is not a subject we wish to discuss.

Posted by: Semanticleo | February 20, 2008 at 08:25 PM

Well, case closed then! Um, but are Kennedy and Clinton able to run again? And just cuz you don't want to discuss a weak point in your argument, does not preclude the other side from bringing it up.

Look everyone - Clinton! Wasn't he just awful? Who? Bush? Oh, that's a subject we don't wish to discuss.

God you people are pathetic, but I suppose that's why you vote Republican and have apparently dedicated your lives to attacking Obama for being -gasp- charismatic. But then reaching the end of one of the least charismatic presidency's in American history does tend to over-accentuate Obama's gifts.

mistermind

"Where was Barack when the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill was stumbling through the Senate?"

Well... He was co-sponsoring it.

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d109:SN01033:@@@P

maryrose

I loved looking at the moon tonight with my children. Ah the simple pleasures of life. Only problem with this NYT story is if MCCain knew they had it and asked them to hold it prior to New Hampshire and South Carolina, primaries.

Cecil Turner

I'm quite sure this doesn't stand up to analysis over any period larger than 1945-now.

I'd suggest you read up on US presidents a bit, then. A total lack of military (or related) experience is rather rare, from our first ex-General on.

If you think that governor of Arkansas is a serious foreign policy job in a way that being a US Senator on the Foreign Relations Committee for four years is not . . .

As much as you'd like to make it so, the words "foreign policy" do not appear in the job title. "Commander in Chief" however, does. And yes, a Governor has a better claim to that sort of experience than a legislative committee member does.

Well, case closed then!

Nice job with the fratricide. (I also suggest you check that irony meter . . . the sensitivity is set a little low.)

Anon

Rich-

Well he has two answers or maybe three.

In his response to Deepak Chopra it was in less than six months-removing brigades at a pace of two a month.

In a response to Steve Kroft at CBS News he stated that "now is absolutely the time to pull out", but then ended the answer with he reserves his rights as C-in-C if an event were to happen.

Anon

Rich-

I'm going to try to google that Chopra(sp?) response for ya-hate to admit this but I think it was at the HuffPo...

MayBee

US Senator on the Foreign Relations Committee for four years is not .

Who has been a US Senator on the Foreign Relations Committee for 4 years?

Anon

I opposed the war in Iraq from the beginning. I thought it was a "rash war," that would damage our interests, trap us in a sectarian conflict, and divert us from finishing the effort against al Qaeda. Changing the definition of success to stay the course with the wrong policy is the wrong course for our troops and our national security.

The time to end the surge and to start bringing our troops home is now - not six months from now. That is why my plan would begin withdrawing our combat brigades immediately. We can draw down 1-2 combat brigades a month, getting all 20 out within 15-16 months. My plan envisions maintaining a small follow on force in Iraq or the region focused on force and facility protection and counter-terrorism. Because there is a humanitarian crisis unfolding in Iraq now - with more than 4 million Iraqis having been forced from their homes - my plan would also dramatically increase investment in refugee assistance. Lastly, in an effort to get Iraq's political leaders to resolve the political disagreements at the heart of their civil war, I would work with the United Nations to call a constitutional convention in Iraq, using aggressive diplomacy to get the neighbors to back that convention and stop the flow of weapons and terrorists into Iraq.

Huffington Post

If you read at the link you'll find that the only thing they seem ton want to work with the UN on or feel they have an international responsibility towards-is-

Global Warming-the concerns that you list?

I don't see it.

Don

Ron Paul has military experience! It's not too late Republicans!

Lesley

If 9/11, Iraq, torture, Katrina, outing a CIA agent etc. ad nauseum had happened on Clinton's or any Democrat's watch, these wingnut windbags would be in a right furious lather, but somehow when a Republican commits crimes and makes stupid decisions, he's excused - and even applauded - for every single one of them.

Meanwhile they're still in a lather over a blowjob.

Christ, this level of stupid should be illegal. Aren't you people ashamed of yourselves?

Anon

So he would start to withdraw immediately and almost completely in about a year and three months.

I think Hillary doesn't want to start till after six...and this is where he is trying to gain political advantage by being even more audacious.

Funny how they have the hope for everyone, and everything but winning the war and for the future of Iraq.

Don

Now Powerlies chimes in: "Tomorrow's story is just one more reminder of why no sophisticated person takes the Times seriously as a news source."

Actually, the reason is Judy Miller, genius, but close enough.

Rick Ballard

The suit remains empty. BHO the Red just ain't got nothin but changey hope for dopes.

MayBee

Lesley- we bombed Iraq and starved the people with sanctions under Clinton's watch, the Branch Davidians all died on Clinton's watch, people in the MidWest had waited forever for flood relief under Clinton's watch, 500 people died in a heat wave under Clinton's watch, Clinton ramped up extraordinary renditions, we have no idea if he waterboarded, and the World Trade Center, two African Embassies, and the US Cole were attacked by terrorists under Clinton's watch.
Yet, I never got in a lather. It is an unhealthy hobby, I think, to pursue anger at every turn.

Cecil Turner

. . . we have no idea if he waterboarded . . .

Of course he did (all the guys going through SERE School, if nothing else). But it wasn't "torture" back then.

Other Tom

"34 is the best you got?"

Twice as good as Congress. And here's a bulletin: he's not running.

glasnost

Cecil, this is fun and all. Since Barack Obama is going to be the nominee, and I'm sure that McCain will try to make this point until they're blue in the face, we'll just have to wait for the results, eh?

I'm not losing a lot of sleep. It's pretty clear from history that experienced men, in war and foreign policy alike, are often terrible at their jobs, while the inexperienced are sometimes just flat-out talented for them. But this is another debates on the merits of the question, which is a sidetrack. The point of the post is: is this argument a political winner?
John McCain, a man with a looser tongue than Howard Dean, underfunded and with lukewarm base support, running on a platform of pursuing unpopular tax cuts and an unpopular war, on the coattails of the least popular president since at least Jimmy Carter and arguably Herbert Hoover, as the US heads into a recession, is about to run against Barack Obama, whom a bunch of folks, including conservative pundits, seem to consider a somewhat talented and charismatic guy. If Barack wins less than 10 more states than John Kerry did, I'll owe betting money to several friends of mine.

MayBee

oh I'm sorry- 739 people died in the heatwave of 1995

Topsecretk9

I am so snooze on the McCain story. I mean I would be snooze if it were Obama too and I was also snooze with the Hilary "Huma" or whatever her name is rumor too.

Seriously. Unless the NYT's and the Democrats are really saying having a extramarital affair with a grown woman makes one unfit to be President - remember 23 year old Monica was deemed to be a consenting adult woman by NOW - then that makes them to have been derelict for a long time because they had no problem with the Kennedy's #2 pastime of skirt chasing on many wives. #1 being booze.

Democrats specialize in erasing and ignoring the actual aspects that matter in their scandals. Bill only got a blow job, but lets pretend proffering false affidavits to the courts is of now consequence.

If McCain had done that, then I'd care.

Also, I could be wrong, but the NYT's is such a failed business it appears they don't even get when they pre-maturely shoot their wad.

Other Tom

"I suggest you look at the 65% approval rating."

Why? Is he running for something? And the last poll I saw, Reagan trounced him (this was less than a week ago).

Other Tom

"If 9/11, Iraq, torture, Katrina, outing a CIA agent etc. ad nauseum had happened on Clinton's or any Democrat's watch..."

Let's see...World Trade Center I, Khobar Towers, African embassy bombings, USS Cole and the establishment of terror training camps in Afghanistan all happened on Clinton's watch. Clinton repeatedly bombed Iraq and launched cruise missile against it; Bush removed the Saddam regime. Katrina occurred on the watch of a Democratic governor of Louisiana and a Democratic mayor of New Orleans. For torture, Google "extraordinary rendition Clinton" (not to mention Juanita Broaddrick). As for poor Valerie, she was outed by Aldrich Ames on Clinton's watch.

RichatUF

Anon-

found this bit interesting-

I would work with the United Nations to call a constitutional convention in Iraq, using aggressive diplomacy to get the neighbors to back that convention and stop the flow of weapons and terrorists into Iraq...

So he would work to overthrow the already UN written and supported constitution [with the proportional representation voting that is the current biggest stumbling block and is slated to be removed with the reform package vote in Oct], backed up with a retreating army, while Brzezinski and Powers provide foot-massages and whisper sweet-nothings to Assad and Ahmadinejad. I have a feeling they would be unmoved.

Didn't Clinton already take us on this ride already-twice in the region: "Palestanians" and Somalia [we could even make the argument that Bill's Iraq "policy" fell into the same routine]? How has all that worked out?

MayBee

For a reminder of the floods of 1993:


Then the President,.. he was considering mobilizing Federal troops and additional National Guard units to relieve the exhausted guardsmen who have been struggling the better part of a month in the eight affected states ... to shore up levees and evacuate victims.

By some assessments, the overall loss is now pushing close to $10 billion, including the destruction of 8,000 homes and businesses, the displacement of 30,000 people, and the inundation of hundreds of thousands of acres of some of the world's most productive farm land. Furthermore, 27 people have been killed.

New flooding occurred today near West Quincy, Mo., where a levee burst last night,

The President had warned earlier this week that the Federal Government could not be expected to reimburse many flood losses. ...

But while his meeting with the governors was generally friendly, its tone sometimes reflected the strains felt by state leaders confronted with staggering losses and rigid Federal rules.

For everyone who imagines that under Clinton, all natural disasters were contention free and fully under control.
Too bad Anderson Cooper wasn't there to cover it all.

Anon

Rich-

It's a mess on many different levels.

As to what he means by "agressive diplomacy"-my military history profs would have had a field day.

tihs guy-every policy is an oxymoron.

Aggressive diplomacy whilst in an aggressive fast paced retreat-so to speak.

This is the opposite of "speak softly but carry a big stick".

I think it's something like yell and scream like a banshee and make like Monty Python while you-Run Away!

Cecil Turner

I'm not losing a lot of sleep. It's pretty clear from history that experienced men, in war and foreign policy alike, are often terrible at their jobs . . .

Probably the best argument: experience does not ensure competence. And in any event the learning curve is steep and the results are hard to quantify in real time. There are those (including me) who'd argue Clinton's mishandling of Mogadishu severely damaged our prestige, and caused a perception of weakness that resulted in follow-on attacks (including embassy bombings in Africa and eventually 9/11). Others would read it entirely differently.

Still, it's hard to avoid the fact that the Dems are on the verge of proffering what appears to be the least qualified presidential nominee in history. And that reinforces a popular perception of the party as weak on defense. No telling how this'll play out, but it ought to be entertaining (which it wouldn't, if Barack could've kept it to a beauty contest).

RichatUF

Hey man, nice shot. We can safely say goodbye to this in a BHO administration.

Also what's the deal with unloading the heavy pieces on McCain now? Only skimmed it, but it looks to be a hefty 3000 words-noticed that the Keating-5 makes an appearence too. Must be a RW or Obama story coming down the pike this weekend, so the good stuff had to go out the door now.

Foo Bar

There are those (including me) who'd argue Clinton's mishandling of Mogadishu severely damaged our prestige, and caused a perception of weakness that resulted in follow-on attacks (including embassy bombings in Africa and eventually 9/11)

Let's note that Clinton was getting pressure at the time (October '93) to "cut and run" even faster than he did:


There is no reason for the United States of America to remain in Somalia . The American people want them home, I believe the majority of Congress wants them home, and to set an artificial date of March 31 or even February 1, in my view, is not acceptable. The criteria should be to bring them home as rapidly and safely as possible, an evolution which I think could be completed in a matter of weeks.

Our continued military presence in Somalia allows another situation to arise which could then lead to the wounding, killing or capture of American fighting men and women. We should do all in our power to avoid that.

I listened carefully to the President's remarks at a news conference that he held earlier today. I heard nothing in his discussion of the issue that would persuade me that further U.S. military involvement in the area is necessary. In fact, his remarks have persuaded me more profoundly that we should leave and leave soon.


Walter

The poll up on the right just asked me if the Air Force will be able to shoot down the malfunctioning satellite.

When did the Air Force get an Aegis cruiser?

Elliott

...compared to Obama he's a frickin' prodigy...

Nice job with the fratricide. (I also suggest you check that irony meter . . . the sensitivity is set a little low.)

Cecil, I think very highly of your commentary and wanted to compliment you for being in especially fine form tonight.


Jim Rockford

You'll lose your bet.

Obama only appeals to wealthy white Yuppies, college kids, and blacks.

Obama wants to confiscate all handguns and semi-auto rifles. NRA GOTV will be massive, and deny him most Southern and Western states.

Obama has tons of new taxes planned, including ones for foreign aid to Africa -- in a time of recession. Tax cuts are popular with ... taxpayers. McCain's advantage. "Global Tax on America" will be easy to ridicule.

Obama's entire manner is condescending and offputting to ordinary people. He might as well be a WWE "heel" the way he acts. His wife is a lose cannon who called whites all racists and irredeemably evil in her thesis (which will leak out). His racist pastor, his nutty church, his staff filled with Nation of Islam people all make him a "heel." He might as well shout "Nation of Domination!"

Obama wants to surrender NOW! in Iraq, while we are winning at great cost. Surrender to AQ. Osama. Wow that's going to be popular.

Americans HATE losing. Obama has a whole dose of losing is morally good for you.

Obama wants to replace blue collar, mostly white, manufacturing jobs with "green jobs" by sending manufacturing to China, signing Kyoto, and .... well those Green Jobs will come sometime, maybe.

THAT is a loser.

Obama's backers: college kids, yuppies, Blacks, are the "enemies" of the working white middle class and working white working class. Particularly white men. McCain will crush Obama in working class white men who make up 25% of the electorate. Meanwhile Dems are very visibly saying "So long white boy"

kim

Outing a CIA agent? Since when was Joe Wilson President?
================================

kim

Obamamania is a souffle. I suspect the Dems will regret their choice come convention time. If Hillary doesn't steal it, and I don't think she can now, then maybe they'll turn to Gore just as the Arctic fails to melt, and dropping temperatures worldwide can no longer be ignored. Here's hoping.

Thompson was the only one to get global warming right. And Libby. Where is his brain trust?
=======================

kim

I have hopes McCain will pick Romney. Oh boy, an eloquent Bush and a likable Cheney. What's not to like?

There are so many ways Obama can fly off the tracks. His Change Blossom Special had to roar down the tracks to outpace the Clinton Limited, but there's only so much coal in that tender. I hope.
============

Tom Maguire

Foo Bar - re the requisite Bush-bashing as a prospective CinC, McCain has not exactly been shy about that up to now; he just disguises it as Rumsfeld-bashing.

And I'm not sure how an Obama counter of "I'm as experienced as Bush" will be reassuring.

Was it Appalled who cited Obama's good judgment in opposing the Iraq war? 90% of the Congressional Black Caucus opposed it, so another theory is that Obama took precisely the view we would expect from an urban black lib politico. Did he show good judgment about the war, or about his own political base?

BumperStickerist

Hey Bumper! Nice way to wholly dodge any of Lesley's points and go right to the ad hominem attack. At least when SN! gives you the once-over, they take a moment to show why they you're an idiot. It's called substance.

Ummmmm .... Lesley didn't make any points, per se. There was just a general vomiting of data points taken directly from that SN! post and comments.

Given the points chosen and the analysis provided, if you believe, among other things, that Bush outed Plame, you're willfully ignorant to the point of irretrievability.

The balance of the items on the list is just a spasm of Bush derangement - an inchoate, teenaged list of "Bush Sucks!".


BumperStickerist

Going back to a point I made earlier -

Obama lacks gravitas.

Prove me wrong.

-

Jane

What is "SN"?

BumperStickerist

SN = SadlyNo!

It's a group-blog that writes from a left/progressive perspective in a style that passes for analysis and humor to a like-minded audience.

clarice

Cecil's always great reading.
Anon, I thought that a good point. Maybe O's motto should be"Speak loudly but carry a little stick".

Middyfeek

Stay focused, folks. The Clintons aren't gone yet. Anything, Obama, McCain, Donald Duck, is preferable to those two useless, posturing parasites.

Sue

Maybee,

No one remembers the Chicago heat wave of 1995. http://www.slate.com/id/2125572/>Of course Katrina was Bush's fault because he failed to heed the lessons he should have learned when Chicago baked and people died and all that was needed was ice and water. And there were no floods to contend with. And the entire Gulf Coast was not involved. This is the mindset of the Lesley's out there.

eldridgecleaverwasarepublican

I ♥ the Magic Negro!

clarice

McCain has declared war on the NYT's..Bennett has taken the lead claiming the paper refused to note the ca. 12 times McCain took positions in opposition to Iseman, i.e. Well, it'll be fun to see him hit Pinch upside the head......

anduril

Karl Rove has some ideas: Obama's New Vulnerability. Rush highlighted some of this yesterday.

kim

Is 'middifeek' between 'minifeek' and 'magnifeek'?
============================

kim

Yes, A, Obama had a nice smelling souffle for the unconscious muddle; why is he steering hard left when he should be pandering more to the ignorant.

His strategists are clowns; he's only gotten this far because of Hillary's high negatives, even among Democrats.
========================

GMax

I saw Beenett last night on Hannity & Colmes on to promote his book but unable to talk about much more than McCain, he was more than a little frustrated. But as he said, look I am a Democrat but proceeded to obliterate the NYT on their story and provided his first hand take on the Keating 5 indicating that he recommended to the committee as cheif counsel that McCain be exonerated. First time in history he said that the committee ignored the advice of their counsel, and indicated it was because the other 4 ( of the 5) were Democrats and they did not want to have hearings on just Democrats.

Foo Bar

Did he show good judgment about the war, or about his own political base?

He had already unsuccessfully run for Bobby Rush's seat in Congress, so advancing as a Chicago-only politician was pretty much out. For someone with an eye on statewide office, opposing the Iraq war was not an obvious call politically in the fall of '02 in a state with a Republican governor and one Republican Senator (and Bush riding high in the polls).

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame