Defending Joe Klein (Kinda; Then I Flip-Flop And Attack Viciously)

Joe Klein of TIME goes well over the top in defending The One from a nearly reasonable observation by John McCain:

John McCain said this today in Rochester, New Hampshire:

This is a clear choice that the American people have. I had the courage and the judgment to say I would rather lose a political campaign than lose a war. It seems to me that Obama would rather lose a war in order to win a political campaign.

This is the ninth presidential campaign I've covered. I can't remember a more scurrilous statement by a major party candidate. It smacks of desperation. It renews questions about whether McCain has the right temperament for the presidency. How sad.

Ann Althouse has a lovely takedown of Klein, I am scoring Q&O second, but will cheerfully consider other nominees.

Now, I think Joe Klein is out to lunch, but here is where I am guessing he is coming from.  First, he is taking McCain's comment personally - without even checking, I'll bet that Klein opposed the surge and does not consider himself to have been seeking defeat. [That was an easy money bet].

So the rest of my guess - let's give Barack specifically and Defeatocrats generally the benefit of the doubt and assume that they were rooting hard for the war in Iraq to succeed and only regretfully came to the conclusion that their opposition had been vindicated by Iraq's seeming collapse into near-civil war (or actual civil war, per pre-updated Barack) in 2006.  (Let me note that I knew some anti-war libs that were so triumphantly vindicated that one might almost have suspected they were pleased to see the Great Imperialist get its come-uppance while providing an object lesson to the world on the importance of Giving Peace a Chance.  But let me not presume they were actually glad to have been right, and I have no doubt they were sincere in their horror at the human cost.)

So Barack and other Dems leaders swept into power with regrets, never having hoped to see Bush's war go sour.  In that sense, and if you believe that, it would be outrageous to say that Barack "would rather lose a war".  Of course he wanted the US to win, but since we had, as of 2006, manifestly lost, the key mission, as he explained in 2007 and 2008 speeches, was "ending the war", not winning it.  And to suggest that Barack (and by extension, Joe Klein) wanted us to lose has outraged Joe Klein.  All Barack and Joe wanted was a recognition of Bush's failure and an end to a seemingly useless US involvement.

Well, that is my guess as to the source of Klein's outrage.  A quick read of his June 2008 piece acknowledging the surge's success is interesting - it sounds identical to Barack's current talking points about the importance of other political factors, our exhausted military, Iraq as a distraction, and so on.  Victory was not an option!  No wonder Klein is peeved  - his position overlaps almost perfectly with the target of McCain's criticism.

NOW DEFEAT IS NOT AN OPTION:  Klein provides a laugher in an update:

The reality is that neither Barack Obama nor Nouri al-Maliki nor most anybody else believes that the Iraq war can be "lost" at this point. The reality is that no matter who is elected President, we are looking at a residual U.S. force of 30-50,000 by 2011 (a year ahead of the previous schedule).

Does "most anybody else" include General Petraeus, who, per Barack himself, wants a flexible, reality-based withdrawal schedule?  This idea that Messr. "We Can't Win" has become Mr. Victory Is Ours is rich.

BURIED LEAD:  Has TIME or any other outlet reported Obama's buoyant view of the situation in Iraq?  And how come Obama keeps describing his plan to "end" the war, rather than to win it?  As of July 20 (I know, three long days ago) Joe Klein was presenting this:

For McCain, the first priority remains a stable Iraqi nation-state, and he is willing to risk ever more American blood and treasure over the coming years in that quest. For Obama, the first priority is an exit from the country, and he is willing to risk civil chaos in Iraq and a loss of American influence in the region.

Maybe I am not clear what Mr. Klein means by "defeat".  Would a civil war be a defeat in Obama's view?  How doe sMaliki feel about that?

BONUS SNARK:  Joe Klein last April:

Few people believe that the Sunni Awakening movement—the insurgents who flipped to our side after a fling with al-Qaeda—would stay peaceful if the U.S. military weren't there as a buffer between them and the Shi'ites.

That was then.  Now, the Awakening is one more fortuitous turn of events.

Comments

[sbw]

as... as... as..?

[MayBee]

I remember when during the last election John Kerry said Bush "ripped the heart out of the heartland", and when various Dems accused Bush of lying us into war.

Why in the world is this statement by McCain more scurrilous, in Klein's eyes? I think TM is right- it is most likely because Klein agrees with Obama and quite possibly Bush's critics.

[sbw]

Ending the war as the Democrats concluded was necessary would have left a power vacuum. A power vacuum isn't no-government; It's the opportunity for thugs, briggands, and bands of marauders to rape and pillage, much like occurred in Europe after the Huns, Goths, and Vandals.

Now, it would be a pedant who would parse victory or loss in such a way as not to face the consequences of American policy proposed by Obama in January, 2007, to have troops withdrawn by March, 2008.

The Dem policy, put forward by the Big O and narrowly stopped in the Democratic Congress would not have been a win. The worldwide consequence of the resulting chaos would have negatively affected Americans for the foreseeable future. Reasonable people would label that a loss.

Big O chose loss and Klein did, too. Lay out the long-term consequence of withdrawal and they won't face up to it.

[Ranger]

Actually, I think McCain held this latest barb until after Obama said that even knowing what he knows now, we would have oppsed the surge because Bush needed to be opposed. In that one statement, Obama opened himself up to this line of attack, because he clearly stated that it was more important to oppose Bush than win the war.

As to the anger that Klein exhibits, I can only say that the truth must hurt him very deeply.

As to this statemnt:

I have no doubt they were sincere in their horror at the human cost.

I do question the sincerety of their horror given that they were not at all horrified to see 1 million Iraqis die under the Clinton administration, and then claim that after decade of failed policy "conatainment is working" as an argument to oppose the removal of the Saddam regime.

[Rick Ballard]

Seditionists are notoriously thin skinned. Maybe Klein and Obama can get to gether (with Ayers) and burn a flag to drown their sorrows?

[clarice]

Does anyone really care what he thinks? Besides bloggers and his colleagues that is? Ditto Andrew Sullivan.
Isn't this just an upscale variation of games people play-?

[MarkO]

Why the rather tepid but heartfelt defense of such a political hack? Do you really think he is sincere? Are we to put him on the couch and tease out his possible sadness? I see it as the ordinary response from a partisan whose candidate has just been exposed. It is a distraction. Klein should have set out the evidence that the Young Prince wanted to win the war. Really. BHO listed many ways we might otherwise have spent the money. A win in Iraq is a vivid defeat for the Obama judgment team.

[Danube of Thought]

I've been saying for a long time that there was a good part of the American left sincerely hoping for an American defeat in Iraq, in part to complete the demonization of George Bush, but more importantly to restrain the US from future military adventurism. As one recent example that comes to mind, reacll the abject fool Tim Robbins saying "it's time we got our ass kicked." I don't ascribe any such motive to Obama (only colossaly bad judgment on the surge); as to Klein I am agnostic.

[clarice]

In other good news:
(Fox)"The New York Times (NYT: 13.07, +0.21, +1.63%) fell as low as $12.38 this morning after its second quarter earnings missed estimates. Profits plunged 82% to $21 mn versus the $118 mn posted in the same period a year ago, a period that was helped along by the one-time sale of an asset. The share plunge is the lowest since July 1995. Print ads dollars at the Times continue to shrivel, sending operating income in a nosedive, as ad dollars continued their inexorable march toward the Internet. Hotels, automakers, airlines, all hurt by high energy prices, have pulled back sharply.... "

[MayBee]

How does Obama know, by the way, that Afghanistan isn't going to just spontaneously right itself as he thought Iraq was about to do? Why send more troops there?

[Tom Maguire]

Why the rather tepid but heartfelt defense of such a political hack?

Good question. Because I do think there is a difference between recognizing defeat and preferring it, and I do have plenty of lib friends who back Obama and would have been delighted to see us win in Iraq but didn't think it was possible. Just in the last month I had an awkward moment at a dinner party when I said that victory in Iraq was possible and folks wanted to know what I was drinking, smoking, and mainlining.

A few weeks go by and now everyone knows that we can't lose. Hey, hey. I hope my lefty friends are paying attention.

[clarice]

My lefty friends tend to dress better so I hate to dump them, either. But I try to plan events where we don't have to talk much except about stuff like kids,art and food.

[Porchlight]

Because I do think there is a difference between recognizing defeat and preferring it,

I do, too, but I think it's a very thin line. We wouldn't have the generalized problem of underreported good news if most people were genuinely hoping for victory. The anti-war people are politically and emotionally invested in defeat; good news on the war front is bad news for them, and is spun accordingly. After many years of being vilified as a supporter of the war, I find it hard to extend the benefit of the doubt on this.

[MayBee]

Because I do think there is a difference between recognizing defeat and preferring it, and I do have plenty of lib friends who back Obama and would have been delighted to see us win in Iraq but didn't think it was possible.

Most of my best friends are lib, and most of them hate Bush and want us out of Iraq.
Their belief is along the lines of "war- what is it good for? Absolutely nothing (say it again)". Truly, they believe there is never any good reason to fight a way.

So while I don't know that they were rooting against us in this war, they weren't really rooting for us either. They just wanted it over. Losing is neither bad nor good. In that way, I think McCain is absolutely right.

[MayBee]

fight a war

[hit and run]

TM:

Because I do think there is a difference between recognizing defeat and preferring it,

I do think that more accurately summarizes your relationship to the Yankees than libs to Iraq.

Well certain libs. I am not speaking of those on your dinner party circuit.

[Topsecretk9]

just a cursory observation, but hasn't Joe Klien been trying to get back in the good graces of the nutroots for a while now for supporting the war or something?

[MarkO]

Tom: that helps. I didn't mean to suggest that there were not good folks of sincere mind who opposed the war and the continued push. As I write this I seem to remember my dad giving me the benefit of the traitor doubt about Viet Nam. To confess (which I so rarely do) I think my feelings about Obama's phoniness overtook my better angels. But Edwards is still scum.

[sbw]

We most assuredly can lose in Iraq. Still. And forevermore still.

The Dems are playing a game that gets pretty tiring after 500 years. Win and lose is old style Macchiavelli. If we are, even after Locke and the Founding Fathers' Constitution, going to get beyond Niccolo, then the proper measure of success is going to have to become a working peaceful process of problem resolution that those underneath its protective umbrella buy into.

Can the Big O -- can Joe Klein -- wrap a brain around those concepts -- those principles -- as somehow advantageous to civilization? Because, if they can't, we are heading for a great train wreck with zealots of every shape and size trying to blow up the track with their new-found chemistry sets.

This is not a game.

[Rick Ballard]

When those "certain libs" successfully raise 1,000 American soldiers and 10,000 Iraqi civilians from the graves which the lib seditionists "all is lost" mendacity consigned them, then it might be possible to grant them leeway.

They did not "recognize defeat", for defeat could never be achieved without their active and vociferous support. They encouraged and supported murderers - not like that is any surprise wrt liberals or progressives.

[MikeS]

Some people have been talking quagmire since the early days of war against the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. They warned that the oil fields of Iraq would be destroyed, that the "Arab Street" would explode into a war with us, that our troops would be massacred in bloody house to house fighting or that they would freeze to death in the mountains of Afghanistan,and on and on. These warnings and every other part of their propaganda and prediction has been utterly exploded the stuff didn't happen! Except for one instance, that is the surprisingly brutal insurgency waged against Coalition Forces and Iraqi Citizens.

Antiwar forces cling desperately to that one fact as a vindication for all their erroneous predictions. They are loath to admit that the, now crushed, insurgency in Iraq was anything less than the greatest catastrophe that has ever befallen mankind.

Winning the war in Iraq or the wider War on Terror has been neither stated or implied as a goal of those people. The politicians among them are now desperate to say that they want to win some war somewhere. Joe Klein is insulted by any implication that Obama would choose to loose in Iraq rather than win.

Klein implies that Obama's strategy for "winning" in Iraq is to remove our troops to force Iraqis to stand on their own feet. Yet it seems that Obama's strategy for "winning" in Afghanistan is the opposite. There Obama wants to employ the same Surge strategy that he claims failed or was worthless in Iraq.

Makes ya want to go Hmmm.

[Patrick R. Sullivan]

Ruth Marcus has a few remarks for Barack as he prepares his Ich bin ein beginner speech:

Sixty years ago this month, Berlin stood on the pivot point of history. The Soviet Union choked off food and fuel for the western sector of the divided city. The United States launched an improbable mission to supply it by air.

....Harry Truman's steadfastness in the face of contrary advisers -- some argued for yielding Berlin to the Soviets, others advocated a collision course on the ground -- demonstrated how a determined president, having unleashed the atomic bomb, could then find the narrow path between foolish appeasement and full-scale war. ....

But there are lessons from the airlift that should be more unsettling for those, like Obama, who want to be done with Iraq. The impulse of many Americans then, just as now, was to be finished with the entire project. "'Get Germany off the American taxpayer's back' was the call of conservatives in Congress," ....

An occupation that looked irretrievably lost by spring 1948 turned paradoxically into success as the blockade continued. Berliners' misery deepened, but so, too, did their faith in America and democracy. Berliners who had told pollsters since the war's end that they would choose "economic security" over "freedom" changed their attitudes in the face of American kindnesses.

At home, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, concerned about strains on the military, pressed to halt the airlift. So did the CIA, whose analysts, Cherny notes, "concluded that the United States was now worse off than if the airlift had never been attempted." Truman overruled them all. "We'll stay in Berlin -- come what may," he wrote in his diary in July 1948.

Sixty years later, as Obama arrives in a prosperous, thriving Berlin, it is fair to wonder whether the Cold War might have unfolded differently had Truman decided not to draw the line there against Soviet aggression.

[bgates]

I'll bet that Klein opposed the surge and does not consider himself to have been seeking defeat.
I'll bet that Edwards opposes infidelity and does not consider himself to have been seeking divorce. But actions have consequences.

[bgates]

The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not "insurgents" or "terrorists" or "The Enemy." They are the REVOLUTION, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow -- and they will win.
3 months after making that statement, Michael Moore sat in the President's Box at the Democratic National Convention beside Jimmy Carter.

[MarkO]

He's the only person who will sit next to Jimmy.

[GMax]

These warnings and every other part of their propaganda and prediction has been utterly exploded the stuff didn't happen

Cut and paste this statement and bring it out on nearly every issue that we have heard from our friends across the aisle on. Its damn near universally true.

Not convinced? OK use it in an anthropologic global warming text? Works!

How about NAFTA? Right again!

Do I need to go on? How are these clowns holding an reins of power?

[sbw]

Gmax: How are these clowns holding an reins of power?

How are people tolerating what they say without detecting it for claptrap?

[SWarren]

Don't know if anyone already posted this, I haven't caught up on all the threads. A great exposition of Maliki by Max Boot in the WaPo.
LUN

[Jane]

My lefty friends tend to dress better so I hate to dump them

I ran into a lefty friend from law school at the gym last night. We were talking about a local book club. Out of the blue she announced: "George Bush can't read". She was DEAD SERIOUS. I reminded her of his contest last year with Rove. She shook her head and said. "You are wrong. George Bush can't read."

[Cecil Turner]

All Barack and Joe wanted was a recognition of Bush's failure and an end to a seemingly useless US involvement.

The Dems were "recognizing failure" in the winning strategy, even while its architect was briefing them on the progress. Instead of supporting him, they called him a liar, and tried to pull the rug out from under him:

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.

At best, this was appallingly poor judgment; and it was certainly politically expedient. So tell me Joe, what conclusion am I supposed to draw? Ya'all aren't unconcerned with winning, just too stupid to support what it takes . . . even after it starts working?

[bad]

"You are wrong. George Bush can't read."

I guess she thinks Bush is incredibly accomplished as a speechifier compared to Obama who must use a teleprompter...

[clarice]

Patterico reports Der Speigel completely rewrote the entire Maliki interview substantially distorting its content and Steve Gilbert has a video of Obama completely rewriting his position on negotiating with Iran without acknowledging it's a new position.

[Ric Locke]

Y'know, y'all are missing the most delicious irony in all this.

Barack/Dems: The "surge" didn't work in Iraq. Therefore a surge is immediately necessary in Afghanistan.

Is it not wonderfully brazen?

Regards,
Ric

[Jane]

I guess she thinks Bush is incredibly accomplished as a speechifier compared to Obama who must use a teleprompter...

Boy I really wish I'd thought to say that.

[jimmyk]

I think the left's primary wish is not defeat in Iraq but anything that brings about the defeat of Republicans. In that sense McCain is clearly correct. Their attitude toward war will be remarkably more open-minded if a Democrat is in office. Their main concern is the Supreme Court, though their hatred of GWB seems to have taken on a life of its own.

[JM Hanes]

HotAir linked to a Telegraph article on upcoming operations in Diyala. This detail in their description of the role that the Daughters of Iraq are playing there really got to me:

Three-quarters of a group of 130 women employed in towns in the Diyala River Valley are widows of police officers killed in terrorist attacks.

TM: You may feel like you're sort of defending Joe Klein, but it looks more like anthropology to me.

[Sara]

Klein, Obama, and their whole contingent do not understand the term "peace thru strength." They do not understand that the Middle Eastern world respects strength and exploits weakness. When put to the test, Bush wins their respect even if they don't like him, whereas we all know the mocking "paper tiger" remark made by Osama regarding Clinton and America.

As hard as the the AQI fought and as costly as that period has been, the gains for us are far greater than just a safer, more thriving Iraq. America itself gains in the eyes of the Arab world. We gain from the loyalty we've shown, we gain from the strength we've shown, and we've gained by showing that contrary to conventional wisdom since Vietnam, America doesn't run away and leave its allies to be slaughtered.

War may be a game of strategy and tactics, but it should never be a political game. Dems/libs don't know how to do anything but play games. There is no such thing as loyalty, honor, duty in the dem lexicon. And the idea of having a leader who says what he means and means what he says and then follows through is so foreign to them, they just don't get it, but AQI and AQ get it and therein lies our biggest win.

[JM Hanes]

Not only that, Ric, he thinks promoting democracy in Pakistan is critical to our defense.

[Charlie (Colorado)]

I do question the sincerety of their horror given that they were not at all horrified to see 1 million Iraqis die under the Clinton administration....

If the don't (or can't) vote Democrat, they're not human.

[clarice]

Instapundit picks out quote worthy parts of Althouse's post:
http://www.pajamasmedia.com/instapundit/archives2/022050.php:

ANN ALTHOUSE: Joe Klein's scurrilous meltdown. "If Klein wants to get all outraged about something, he should get outraged retrospectively about how Obama and many Democrats were ready and even eager to embrace defeat. If Klein wants to worry about who is unsuited for the presidency, he ought to recognize that if Obama had been President two years ago, we would have suffered a humiliating defeat in Iraq that would have repercussions for decades." Read the whole thing.

Reader C.J. Burch, who sent the link, adds: "The deal here is that the press longed for this defeat, planned on it, celebrated it and now grieve horribly that they have missed it. Anything else they say is nonsense."

Yes. Had we followed Obama's advice, we'd be having another Vietnam. And some people wouldn't have minded.

UPDATE: Okay, you really do need to read the whole thing. But here's a bit more: "The point is that Obama's judgment would have led this country to jump headlong into defeat. We now must decide if we want this man making choices about things that will arise in the future. Why is it necessary to spell it out again and again that we need to use past judgments to predict future judgments about new matters? I feel like an annoying pedant saying this again. But the reason it's necessary is that journalists like Klein are covering for Obama."

Are they ever.

[Jane]

It doesn't sound like the whole Israel visit went very well.

[Sara]

Via Blackfive:

Hello everyone,

As you know I am not a very political person. I just wanted to pass along that Senator Obama came to Bagram Afghanistan for about an hour on his visit to ' The War Zone ' . I wanted to share with you what happened.

He got off the plane and got into a bullet proof vehicle, got to the area to meet with the Major General (2 Star) who is the commander here at Bagram.

As the Soldiers where lined up to shake his hand, he blew them off and didn't say a word as he went into the conference room to meet the General. As he finished, the vehicles took him to the ClamShell (pretty much a big top tent that military personnel can play basketball or work out in with weights) so he could take his publicity pictures playing basketball. He again shunned the opportunity to talk to Soldiers to thank them for their service.

So really he was just here to make a showing for the Americans back home that he is their candidate for President. I think that if you are going to make an effort to come all the way over here you would thank those that are providing the freedom that they are providing for you.

I swear we got more thanks from the NBA Basketball Players or the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders than from one of the Senators, who wants to be the President of the United States . I just don't understand how anyone would want him to be our Commander-and-Chief. It was almost that he was scared to be around those that provide the freedom for him and our great country.

If this is blunt and to the point I am sorry but I wanted you all to know what kind of caliber of person he really is. What you see in the news is all fake.

In service,

CPT J
Bagram, Afghanistan

[boris]

What you see in the news is all fake.

Bingo.

[boris]

Set up the matrix

WAR . . ELECTION

WIN - - WIN
WIN - - LOSE
LOSE- - WIN
LOSE- - LOSE

Clearly McCain makes claim to the first two.
Even if one grants benefit of doubt to Klein and Bama on Win-Win it is all too obvious that they prefer Lose-Win to Win-Lose. McCain's point stands.

[Sara]

OT - The other day I posted the good news about Bill Russell's incredible fundraising for Q2 over Jack Murtha. I had forgotten one important fact that makes this even more incredible. Malkin details it this morning:

Bill Russell: The man who could topple John Murtha

Last week’s second quarter fundraising reports brought amazing news: Russell outraised Murtha 6 to 1–despite not being able to actively campaign while he complete his military service (Russell is on active duty until Aug. 1).

[glenda waggoner]

The herd of MSM in the tank for Obama are showing their terror. The ones infected with BDS are becoming ads for McCain.

I am hoping the WaPost continues to print the truth of the One's trip and the "message
defining" coming from his flock. It seems the place he leaves immediately comes out to say-well, actually it(what O says) didn't happen that way.

Remember, the Euros are socialists, but they
want a strong America to come to for help.
Just like the Middle East. And the...

I see McCain is visiting an oil rig tomorrow in the Gulf. Could a visit to ANWR be coming?

And Jane, you should tell your liberal friend, if GW can't read, he could never have lied.

[getagrip]

Wow! How utterly ridiculous your posts here are. You are assuming there is a war to win. There is no war in Iraq. There is an occupation - an occupation of a country invaded for no good reason - and the people of Iraq, including their so-called government, wants the occupier to leave. So what is there to win?

You all lost when in 2003 you supported this obvious tragedy in the making.

[sbw]

Nits scratched continue to itch.

[JM Hanes]

We'll be handing the 10 per centers/dead emders designation over to the getagrips any day now.

[JM Hanes]

**dead enders** of course

[bgates]

For some reason I'm reminded of a neat tool for Firefox users called "Greasemonkey". When you go here, you can download a tool that lets you customize how web pages appear. Then if you go here, you get a little script to help deal with - well, you know.

[RichatUF]

JM Hanes,

getagrips will be getting a new set of talking points hopefully soon once this world tour finishes up. Surprise, surprise that this species seems to write out of memory Clinton's War in Iraq and to use the tired "occupation" card for the ongoing operations in Iraq.

I think it was you that pointed how the significant breach of protocol this trip represents. Got me thinking that maybe BHO got wind from his allies in the permanent bureaucracy that something important was coming down the pike and that this trip was designed to derail it. I could see a trip to Afghanistan and Iraq, but the excursion to Jordan, Israel, and Germany seems a bit odd and gratuitious. It could backfire however in that whatever deals were being cut the sides might want to accelerate their timetables because an Obama Administration will be a disaster for all parties.

[glenda waggoner]

Sara
great news @ Murtha-anything we can do to help there and now in Delray,Florida.
If I remember correctly, the dims focused on corruption in the Republican ranks in '06
and that was more of a factor in the majority turning than Iraq(if you believe exit polls)
The RNC needs to plow the road with all the democrats who have seriously gone to the dark side. Most people are tired of how Pelosi takes for granted her authority..if
she won't even let debate on the floor she is running an oligarchy not a republic.

[clarice]

glenda--you're in Delray? Why not get folks together to file suit in federal circuit court to keep Wexler off the ballot on the grounds he's not a resident of Fla?

[BobS]

Sara: Really? You mean to tell me the entire trip might be orchestrated? At any rate, blowing off the troops buys into the elitist reputation he has. Its also shows a clear contempt for people.

[Enlightened]

Oh Really? An Occupation and Obvious Tragedy?

Huh - Millions of Iraqi's that freely voted for the first time in a half century would beg to differ with you, but alas they don't waste their time on dumbshits withoutagrip.

[tina]

Headline over at the Corner:

Messiah Lies About His Senate Committee Assignment

I'm laughing at the Messiah in the headline (and loving it).

He is claiming he is the chair of the Banking Committee, a committee he is not even a member of. He calls is HIS committee! LOL Will the media report it?

LUN

[Sara]

BobS: Orchestrated? Yeah, I figure they had some trouble finding troops who would agree to be orchestrated and choreographed.

[Topsecretk9]

kinda a bad spot for this but NE has updated their story

BTW - remember that lame NTY's story that speculated that people speculated that McCain paid a lot of attention to a lobbyist so therefore he may have had an affair because people wondered and so how much attention the story got?

Me too. Roger Simon was right - the NE has more credibility than the NYTs.

We can now reveal that the man who drove Edwards was Bob McGovern, the same man who drove Rielle to the hotel from Santa Barbara and rented her room in his name.

He was driving a 1999 four-door midnight blue BMW.

Said Butterfield: "The car had a baby seat in the back for Rielle's infant. He pulled into the parking lot, took a ticket from the automated machine, pulled forward, and stopped right after the parking gate lowered. Edwards got out of the passenger side, walked around the front of the car and went in a side entrance near the swimming pool.

"McGovern parked the car and then slowly walked back inside the hotel and went upstairs."

In the aftermath of our exclusive story, the NATIONAL ENQUIRER has now learned:

* Edwards' advisers are "spitting mad and furious" that his late-night escapades have made international headlines because it could derail his chances of becoming Barack Obama's running mate.

* Edwards has not explained his whereabouts to any members of other news media outlets who have been trying to follow up on the story....

Way more at in the link

[Lee A. Arnold]

Soylent Red -- After being corrected by you on the beginnings of the Awakening I found a little more time to research on what is happening now.

By the way Soylent, I found a really good thing for you, co-authored by Scott MacFarlane on exactly what went on in Ramadi starting in June 2006 -- it's a very slow-loading PDF but well worth it, from a recent issue of MIlitary Review:

"ANBAR AWAKENS: THE TIPPING POINT"

http://usacac.leavenworth.army.mil/CAC/milreview/English/MarApr08/Smith_AnbarEngMarApr08.pdf

This is on a list of counterinsurgency reading from the Abu Muqawama blog.

Anyway, what's happening now is not all green lights: violence and killing are on the uptick, but more important maybe is that the Awakened don't think they are being fully integrated into the system: there is room for about only 25% of the fighters in the Iraqi security forces, and the Sunni politicians who rejoined the government aren't exactly the Awakenings crowd. See for example Abu Aardvark, who is fairly non-partisan and follows the regional Arabic press closely:

http://abuaardvark.typepad.com/abuaardvark/2008/06/iraqi-sunnis-af.html

Petraeus talked about this as his biggest nightmare back in March: not finding jobs for the virtual army that the U.S. was facilitating outside the government structure.

Therefore they clearly need more time, at least three to five years more, before we can even begin to see whether an all-Iraq government is possible: but I don't see the U.S. political process giving it to them. The nonsense being slung by both sides has gone too far -- now we're into "lack of patriotism" and the rest of it.

What the public really needs is a full, non-partisan educational course in "nation-building" and counter-insurgency. It's a funny turnabout in a way, because old-time liberal hawks were very much in tune with "nation-building," while republican conservatives were against it. In the 2000 presidential campaign for example, Gore mentioned the possibility while Bush scorned it.

For now, I think the first candidate who explains the Iraq situation clearly and in particulars, and stopped depending upon generalized goals like "victory" -- which is barely definable here, except in the very long term -- will win the White House. Most voters are simply not paying as much attention as the military blog crowd. I take myself as an example: I followed Iraq news closely, but only into 2005 due to other work. Right now it's hard to find time. What galls me is that there still is not, in the U.S. at least, an unimpeachable source of news, including printing corrections when they get it wrong.

Anyway, I still see an opportunity for one or the other of the candidates. If Obama for example had been smart enough to use this trip to turn around to his supporters and say "Here is what is going on," -- that is, actually educating his supporters about the surge -- then he might have taken these new gusts out of McCain's sails. As it stands now, however, I still go with my longtime prediction that McCain will make it by a hair.

[Enlightened]

Well, over at the Corner Kudlow has a post up about the market trends and boy oh boy if a Dem gets into office and Madame Blinker has her way, us clingy, angry folk are going to be paying taxes out the yazoo what with all these bailouts going on....He suspects McCain could possibly win if he came out forcefully and relentlessly on the drill, drill, drill platform.

I am so not into McCain. I will vote for him in any case, but the guys handlers need to set him on a course and stay the course. Cripes.

[glenda waggoner]

Clarice- not in Delray-sister-n-law has 2nd in Jupiter area. Just willing to help unseat Wexler, Murtha- anyone we could make vulnerable on the hypocrit left.

[clarice]

it could derail his chances ,ts...very funny

[Danube of Thought]

It's only July, but this one is a strong contender for nutball imbecility of the year:

"There is no war in Iraq."

(Surely one of our moles made this one up, right?)

To illustrate the entirely appropriate strategem of "pleading in the alternative," law students are told about the man whose neighbor sued him for borrowing his pot and returning it broken. His answer was, "I never borrowed it; it wasn't broken when I returned it; it was broken when I borrowed it."

Obama must immediately take note: there is no war in Iraq. (That'll sure as hell solve a lot of thorny problems in the coming debates, won't it?)

[Ranger]

now we're into "lack of patriotism" and the rest of it.

Posted by: Lee A. Arnold | July 23, 2008 at 04:00 PM

Actually, I am not questioning their patriotism, I am questioning their humanity, at least where Iraq is concerned.

Almost none of the people who are screaming about "the humantiarian disaster" we have "inflicted on Iraq" these days said anything during the late 90s when the sanctions regime was killing aproximately 5,000 Iraqis a month (and that was the low end estimates). Even those who were proved to be much more concerned about partizan politics than human suffering. Bob Herbert of the NYT wrote about a great column critisizing the Clinton administration's approach and essentially said 'either get serious about getting rid of Saddam or stop bombing Iraq, because all you are doing now is killing people to accomplish nothing.' But, when Bush 43 finally got "serious about getting rid of Saddam" suddenly that became the wrong policy for Herbert.

[MarkO]

DOT. And, it wasn't your pot. When I was in law school, one could be severly injured for returning pot broken.

As for arguing from all parts of the record, the notion that there was no war fits in the civil conflict argument. Try to follow along. It won't be easy.

[Danube of Thought]

I'll have to take your word for it--I never encountered anyone who returned pot at all. Once borrowed, it seemed to go into some kind of black hole.

[Topsecretk9]

another OT

Rove has answered questions in which he emphatically and unequivocally denies any involvement in the Alabama governor prosecution - the Scooby Doo mystery the left can't quit.

If TM had time, would be funny if he, for good old times sakes, respond to emptywheel's predictable and hilarious cocksure stupid analysis of it.

[Enlightened]

I'm going to help Tim Robbin's lapdog getaclue - I can't help it, sometimes they are so out there I pity the poor fools.

"Occupation" is a military operation covered under the "Laws of WAR".

Study up.

[bgates]

now we're into "lack of patriotism" and the rest of it
I think it's fair to wonder if you guys even know what 'patriotism' is, given that you loudly profess to have no idea what 'victory' means.

[Lee A. Arnold]

Ranger, I'm not sure why I am being called upon to defend somebody else. But as I am that rarity in the world, an economic lefty but a liberal hawk, I've been in favor of the removal of all dictators and for curing all humanitarian disasters and feeding all the poor since most people in these comments were mewling babes in arms. You want to invade Congo tomorrow? I'm all for it.

[Porchlight]

But as I am that rarity in the world, an economic lefty but a liberal hawk

Lee A. Arnold, back when I was a liberal I held similar views. Then I figured out that it was lefty economics that was largely responsible for creating the hellholes I wanted to rescue poor and oppressed people from.

[sbw]

Lest we forget Tim Robbins and coterie:

Reviewing Terry Teachout's new book, the Wall Street Journal observed in "The Critic and His Culture", WSJ May 5, 2004; Page D12:

"It is the rare playwright who quotes the philosopher Leo Strauss and the rare critic who catches him out doing so dishonestly. In "Embedded," a recent antiwar play, Tim Robbins has one of his oilier characters -- a stand-in for the defense analyst Richard Perle -- citing Strauss to the effect that amoral elites control the ignorant masses to serve their own purposes. Mr. Teachout, writing about the play in The Wall Street Journal, traced the "quoted" words -- not Strauss's at all -- to a Lyndon LaRouche magazine. With such bosh was Mr. Robbins attempting to argue that President Bush went to war, with the help of Strauss-loving elites, merely to secure his re-election."

A lapdog's lapdog blogger discounted the fact completely, saying "OK, that's funny, but it doesn't destroy Robbins's point". Robbins was wrong, but as far as the blogger was concerned, even if he was wrong he was right.

You can't make this stuff up.

[Topsecretk9]

Byron York noticed a sorta denial from Edwards.

I know the NE is waiting for him to do so to roll out the images they got.

[Lee A. Arnold]

Bgates -- I rather guess that YOU have no idea what "victory" means, outside of "all the Iraqis living in a peaceful democracy." Petraeus' surge has been a tactical success that is now running into limits unless something new happens. A Sunni bloc has rejoined the government under a list of conditions, which is a good sign. But then we have three to five more years of nation-building until we get to the point where we can even BEGIN to judge whether a stable all-Iraq government is possible. Beyond that, the important issue is how badly the capability of the United States to do something like nation-building has been poisoned, first by conservatives for decades and now by liberals -- and therefore how poorly our democracy handles the responsibilities of empire. there's the tale of the election! So what's "victory" mean right now? To you, "not leaving." To me, dividing-up the country if they don't change fast, so they stop killing each other. So what? Victory means they all throw barbecues and take the kids to Disneyland.

[Peter]

"I've been in favor of the removal of all dictators and for curing all humanitarian disasters and feeding all the poor since most people in these comments were mewling babes in arms."

Sonny,when I was a "babe in arms", getting personally bombed by Fat Herman's finest,Hitler was the problem and most of these countries didn't exist.

[Ranger]

Ranger, I'm not sure why I am being called upon to defend somebody else.

Posted by: Lee A. Arnold | July 23, 2008 at 05:07 PM

Actually, I wasn't asking you to defend anybody. I was just riffing off of your comment that lamented 'how low things have gotten' because the question of how patriotic people are has come up. I just wanted to make clear that I was not questioning their patriotism (or at least not just their patriotism) but their basic humanity. That includes Obama, who's current argument seems to be that it was much better to kill 1 million Iraqis through sactions that have 100,000 die in the fight to free them from Saddam and later al Qaeda, (which is what I understand his 'contaiment was working so we didn't need to invade Iraq' argument to be).

I do find it rather ironic given that those who have supported the war have been subjected to all kinds of accusations about their patriotism and humanity since before the war even started, and now that things are moving in the right direction and victory seems a real possibility those who advocated defeat are whining about being called for it.

[cathyf]

I swear we got more thanks from the NBA Basketball Players or the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders than from one of the Senators, who wants to be the President of the United States.

I know that we should support the troops and all, but I want to object to this scurrilous slander of NBA players and Dallas cowboy cheerleaders!

[Lee A. Arnold]

Porchlight -- I'm not a communist or a socialist, I'm an economic lefty. Way different. I think Reaganism was nonsense, it's only half of standard economics. Where's the current hellhole in the United States? Wall Street. In the last six months the U.S. taxpayer has bailed-out, plus taken-up as collateral, about a half-trillion in bad paper. With more to come! That's socialism for the rich -- who get it because if they don't, it will crash the whole system, after the deregulation by the free-market nutbags, who were voted-in by the uneducated voters. We need regulations.

[bgates]

I rather guess that YOU have no idea what "victory" means, outside of "all the Iraqis living in a peaceful democracy."
I also have no idea what "aquarium" means, outside of "a big building where they have lots of fish".

[bgates]

socialism for the rich
As if there's any other kind.

[Pagar]

"socialism for the rich"

Is that why President Obama appointed Sen Obama as chairman of the Senate Banking Committee today?

"Where’s the MSM on this? From Obama’s press conference today in Israel:

"Now, in terms of knowing my commitments, you don’t have to just look at my words, you can look at my deeds. Just this past week, we passed out of the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, which is MY committee, a bill to call for divestment from Iran, as a way of ratcheting up the pressure to ensure that they don’t obtain a nuclear weapon."

LUN

[Lee A. Arnold]

Peter, when you were a babe in arms, Congo was already in really bad awful shape. But I'm not blaming you for not doing anything about it all these years, unless you're Belgian!

[Peter]

"My name is Obamandias, king of kings: Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"

Centuries in the future they will find a huge pair of marble ears in the desert.

[Rick Ballard]

"I'm not a communist or a socialist, I'm an economic lefty."

Anyone remember New Coke? Are we going to have a 'World's Tallest Midget' contest here?

[Peter]

"But I'm not blaming you for not doing anything about it all these years, "

Don't be a condescending little prat.By the way what are you going to do for the world when you leave school?

[Peter]

"But I'm not blaming you for not doing anything about it all these years, "

Don't be a condescending little prat.By the way what are you going to do for the world when you leave school?

[Danube of Thought]

"Beyond that, the important issue is how badly the capability of the United States to do something like nation-building has been poisoned, first by conservatives for decades and now by liberals -- and therefore how poorly our democracy handles the responsibilities of empire."

Well, well. Let's talk a bit about "empire," shall we? I take it that most people today consider it an unequivocal term of opprobrium, and to that extent it is one which ought not be used except where it clearly applies. In the case of the United States, that seems very doubtful to me. The definition in my online Merriam-Webster doesn't seem to fit, but let's look a bit further to what have historically been the attributes of empires. There is, of course, sovereign authority over vast reaches outside the home country; there is appropriation of the conquered nations' resources without compensation; and there is conscription of the conquered nations' peoples into the empire's armed forces. Seems a bit of a stretch to me.

And I take it that Congo was something of a hellhole long before the first Belgian hove into view...

[Danube of Thought]

Tops, where and when did Rove answer the questions?

[Danube of Thought]

"Where's the current hellhole in the United States? Wall Street. In the last six months the U.S. taxpayer has bailed-out, plus taken-up as collateral, about a half-trillion in bad paper. With more to come!"

Since Ronald Reagan was elected the Western World has experienced the greatest economic boom in human history. He taught the world the benefits of lower marginal tax rates, and the world learned. All of the squabbles about tax rates in this country since Reagan have been mere quibbles about fine-tuning. Some "nonsense."

[Porchlight]

I'm not a communist or a socialist, I'm an economic lefty. Way different.

Of course. How silly of me.

[Rocco]

I've been in favor of the removal of all dictators and for curing all humanitarian disasters and feeding all the poor since most people in these comments were mewling babes in arms. You want to invade Congo tomorrow? I'm all for it.

Ahh...those "Beacons of Hope"

A week after Shaba Province fell to Laurent Kabila and his rebel troops, mining company executives are swarming around this region of mineral riches and signing lucrative deals despite the uncertainty hanging over the nation's future.

Today, the rebel administration signed its first mining contract, a multimillion-dollar deal with American Mineral Fields a company based in Hope, Ark.

For instance, American Mineral Fields officials have persuaded the rebels to give them the Kolwezi mine-tailings project, even though the Zairian Government was leaning toward a South African firm.

The decision follows attempts by American Mineral to curry favor with Mr. Kabila. Specifically, Mr. Boulle has put his chartered Learjet at the rebel leader's disposal for three weeks.

Mr. Boulle is from Mauritius. The American chief executive officer of his company is Mike McMurrough, a former director and vice president of another of Mr. Boulle's companies, Diamond Field Resources. Mr. McMurrough, of Hope, Ark., President Clinton's hometown, is said to have been a land surveyor there.

Many of these companies are pushing ahead, despite the war being waged all around them. In perhaps the biggest deal, a mining subsidiary of Eurocan Consolidated Ventures signed an agreement in December to build a mine in Tenke Fungurume, a concession believed to contain 220 billion tons of copper and cobalt.

You might be wondering just who owns Consolidated Eurocan Ventures Ltd

In early 1994, Mr. Adolf H. Lundin commenced discussions with La Generale des Carrieres et des Mines ("Gecamines"), Zaire's state-owned mining company, regarding the possible acquisition of an interest in the Tenke Fungurume copper-cobalt deposits.

What would those poor indigenous people do without guys like this?

Lundin Group pledged $100 million to a mining industry initiative to fight poverty through former President Bill Clinton's charitable foundation, the Clinton Foundation said Friday.

You humanitarian you...

The Commission calls for a number of the contracts to be rescinded or renegotiated, for several companies to be investigated and for a number of individuals to be prosecuted.

[Enlightened]

Silky Pony at Breibart denying the NE. Priceless - my son was two years old and lied better than this.

[PaulL]

Enlightened,
That video clip is indeed priceless. Watching Edwards's expression is hilarious and a lot more revealing than reading the non-denial denial.

[Lee A. Arnold]

"Don't be a condescending little prat." -- Peter, I didn't realize that your condescension was not to be met in kind.

[Lee A. Arnold]

Danube -- The "greatest economic boom in history" had mostly to do with technological innovation (computers, in the U.S.) and trade liberalization. Growth rates in the United States were even higher at other times, when marginal tax rates were higher.

[Danube of Thought]

Where is the Edwards clip?

[Enlightened]

Can't you leftards go somewhere else and play? Y'all are thick as planks and no amount of smacking you upside the head with a stupid stick is gonna help. The same monotonous recantation of the same monotonous DNC playbook ad nauseum by the same mental midget sockpuppets is just - monotonous. Go play with the big dogs over at FDL, they got just the thing for ya.

[Enlightened]

DOT - go over to Hot Air in the headlines on Breitbart.tv