PDA

View Full Version : The Week in Blog: Nose-blowing Messiah


Bloggingheads
02-24-2008, 03:45 PM

Jay J
02-24-2008, 05:10 PM
So Conservatives will say that Obama will need to admit that he was wrong about the "surge?"

Pffft.

So we can't use a time machine to go back in time and re-debate the decision to go to war in the first place, but we can go back in time and debate the merits of the surge?

Granted the surge is more recent, but the importance of the surge is SMALL POTATOES compared to the decision to go to war in the first place.

BTW, I don't think anyone denies that the surge is succeeding on tactical, or military grounds. The question has always been whether the surge is achieving what it was supposed to politically, which was the purpose behind it in the first place.

IF it becomes apparent that McCain was right about the surge (big IF) then that will still be a tiny issue compared to the decision to go to war in the first place.

But of course that won't stop anyone from making the argument.

Wonderment
02-24-2008, 05:36 PM
Were a delight to behold.

Not that I'm taking an Obama presidency in '09 for granted (shit, I'm not even taking it for granted that Obama will be alive on Inauguration Day), but it's nice to see prominent conservative bloggers so resigned to the prospect of McCain loss.

Bloggin' Noggin
02-24-2008, 05:37 PM
http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/9031?in=00:24:54&out=00:25:17

This argument of Conn's is the same dodge that the conservatives have been trying to run with George Bush ever since he became unpopular. Talk about messiahs! George Bush was their messiah for as long as his poll numbers were high -- or at least as long as he was winning elections. Now that he's unpopular, his unpopularity just goes to prove that he was never a real conservative (as proved by the very initiatives he proposed or passed while he was conservative messiah).
At the current time, a hard line conservative (one who didn't at least make the centrist noises that McCain sometimes does) would have done worse than McCain in the general election, as proved repeatedly by polling. It's a little ridiculous to say that if McCain fails it doesn't show something about the popularity of conservatism at the moment, when a more conservative candidate would have done worse.

I also find it funny that Conn is counting on Bush's sad-sack economy and Bush's stupid unplanned war to foul the nest for Obama so that we can go back to another Bush. It's unfortunate that this is entirely possible.

bjkeefe
02-24-2008, 05:53 PM
Jay J:

Good rebuttal to the surge question as campaign football. I'll add another point that will probably make McCain's case even weaker: it's likely, if recent trial balloons from SecDef Gates mean anything, that the scheduled troop withdrawals -- as specified and promised by the architects of The Surge -- are likely to to delayed. If McCain starts going on and on about "The Surge is working, and you must bow down before me and beg forgiveness," the easy sound bite in return is, "So why aren't the troops being brought home when you guaranteed they would be?"

I'm not here to support such a simplistic argument, mind. I'm just saying that if McCain supporters think the supposed success of The Surge is going to be a winning point during the campaign, I think they're in for a rude surprise.

Bloggin' Noggin
02-24-2008, 06:00 PM
Yeah, I thought that was pretty lame, myself. And you nicely capture exactly why: we've gotta be forward-looking, forget about recriminations! the past is off-limits (except when it's not)!
I'm still wondering what happens when all those Republican anti-war voters who preferred McCain over the other Republican candidates finally get it through their heads just how pro-war (not just pro-Iraq-War) McCain appears to be.
This spoof McCain ad (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gwqEneBKUs&NR=1) seems to give a pretty good idea whose message is Reagan optimism and whose is Carter-malaise-speech. No wonder Conn is making what Wonderment calls "preemptive excuses".

bjkeefe
02-24-2008, 06:00 PM
BN:

This argument of Conn's is the same dodge that the conservatives have been trying to run with George Bush ever since he became unpopular.

Yes. And I was very glad that Bill was so quick to point out the lunacy of the rightosphere, and the extreme conservative movement in general, that they still don't take any responsibility for why their philosophy is losing appeal. It's not like there weren't a bunch of real conservatives in the primary, plus most every other candidate trying to sound as conservative as possible. The fact is, their own party rank-and-file rejected every single one of them. The far right's current urge to purge anyone lacking sufficient purity is characteristic of a failing movement.

Bloggin' Noggin
02-24-2008, 06:10 PM
I'm not here to support such a simplistic argument, mind. I'm just saying that if McCain supporters think the supposed success of The Surge is going to be a winning point during the campaign, I think they're in for a rude surprise.

Soundbytes are always "simplistic" in a sense, in that they have to stand in for the whole future course of an argument, the whole series of replies and rebuttals that the soundbyte generates. But as a soundbyte, I don't see anything unfair or too simplistic about that point.
I don't think the McCain "100 years" quotation is at all unfair to McCain either. Yes, he was imagining a case where somehow, magically American soldiers were there in fairly manageable numbers and weren't being killed. But if you try to imagine how the argument goes after that reply, the obvious next question is "what plan have you got to get us to that state within a reasonable time (much, much less than that 100 years)? The surge didn't do it. We don't have the troops to do double the surge -- we don't even have enough to maintain it without further breaking the army. The soundbyte isn't so terribly unfair because we can see how the argument plays out from there and it doesn't go well for McCain.

Jay J
02-24-2008, 08:30 PM
Bloggin,

LMAO at that video!

As an Obama supporter, the Yes We Can video with Will.i.am was a little too mushy for me, since I'm concerned about the "empty suit" meme about Obama.

But I'm glad others are inspired by it, and hey, with a spoof of McCain like that coming out of it...well, it was worth it.

I'm gonna email that thing around.

Bloggin' Noggin
02-24-2008, 09:02 PM
Hi Jay,
Glad you liked it. And if you liked the McCain one, the Dick Cheney (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gI7WwY4a9ro)one is possibly even funnier.

And while we're at it, here's an ad (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/179811.php)in favor of that great conservative principle that Conn Carroll was standing up for a week or two ago -- telecom immunity.

uncle ebeneezer
02-24-2008, 09:40 PM
I think Obama's response to McCain's attempt to corner him on the surge should be either:

1.) "Let's take a step back and talk about what the goals of the surge were before we pass judgement on it's success. The stated goals of the surge were..." And then spell out why not everyone agrees that the surge has been a "success".

Or

2.) "Mr. McCain why are we beginning this question of judgement to a moment that was AFTER 3,000 American soldiers had already been killed in a war you supported? If we want to compare our respective judgements, those 3,000 lost Americans seem to me to be something we shouldn't just gloss over."

Both approaches have their own +'s and -'s, but either way, I think Obama is in good position to be either subtle or nasty. I think he'll be fine.

bjkeefe
02-24-2008, 11:45 PM
BN:

Isn't that telecom immunity ad a hoot? I just saw it myself before coming over here.

Did Conn really stand up for telecom immunity? Eeesh. This is one of those things that almost seems reasonable when you first think about it -- hey, the government asked for help -- but five seconds later, you think, wait a minute. All they had to do was to ask for a warrant. Even if you could forgive the bad or weak decision-making on the part of individuals at the telcos, it's well worth punishing the companies, for the sake of precedent, and as a reminder, if nothing else.

It's amazing to me how often the party that loves to talk about itself as standing for the "rule of law" is so quick to beg for the exceptions every time they get caught.

donroberto
02-25-2008, 03:59 AM
In retrospect, all those who interpreted Clinton's conciliatory tone as resignation when she cooed that she was honored to be sitting next to Senator Obama, and that, oh gee, the issue of super delegates will just somehow take care of itself, were duped by all her faux civility.

Yesterday she was angry and indignant over Obama's pamphlet in which he criticized her health plan and her support of NAFTA. Today she was overtly mocking and dismissive of his inspirational message of hope. Way over the top on both counts. So it has become clear that her post-debate strategy is to step up the personal attacks. She is not going quietly and will probably take it all the way to the convention, lobbying, spinning and arm twisting all along the way for Florida, Michigan and super delegates. In the Clintons' minds, that's how the issue of super delegates takes care of itself.

Sgt Schultz
02-25-2008, 08:31 AM
Just horribly insulting to the viewership.
Get rid of hash-brownie man.
Sly, knowing, sardonic smiles at the precise moments Conn is crushing his assumptions.
Pathetic.

Bloggin' Noggin
02-25-2008, 09:58 AM
Just horribly insulting to the viewership.
Get rid of hash-brownie man.
Sly, knowing, sardonic smiles at the precise moments Conn is crushing his assumptions.
Pathetic.

Any examples, Schultz? Without them, I'm going to have to suspect that LeBeau has been sneaking hash into your strudel, because Conn was the one whose position seemed pretty weak this time. http://www.bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?p=70782#poststop

ohcomeon
02-25-2008, 10:21 AM
Mr. Carroll is absolutely right that the election of Senator Obama against John McCain will not signal the end of the conservative movement. That signal occured when John McCain achieved the Republican nomination.

Bloggin' Noggin
02-25-2008, 10:41 AM
I'm certainly not arguing that it WILL end the conservative movement. But it isn't just a weird fluke that McCain rather than someone more conservative got the nomination. It's precisely because Bush has given the conservatives such a bad name that the Republicans' best chance (as revealed in polls matching up the major Rep candidates against major Dem candidates) was John McCain. If a more conservative candidate would have been even more soundly rejected than McCain will be, then it's a bit bizarre to suggest that conservatism hasn't been repudiated in an election in which McCain himself is repudiated.