Jonathan Singer at MyDD has a post up that discusses Obama’s very effective frame for coming at Bush/McCain on their foreign policy positions: What are they so afraid of? It nicely poisons the fear well that Bush and McCain like to go to in order to market themselves as “tough.” Whenever they say something that implies that the American people ought to be afraid, it makes them look fearful as well. It leads to an inference that Bush and McCain went to war in Iraq because their fear made them overreact to the threat, such as it was, posed by Saddam Hussein.
There are things in this world of which it’s rational to be afraid, of course. But, we want a leader who reacts to those things in a rational way and does not overreact in an emotional way. The unthinking “tough guy” approach is an emotional approach. Keeping the lines of communication open to our enemies, even if we’re not prepared to concede to their demands to any appreciable extent, is a rational approach.
Another silly news cycle starting with McCains speech yesterday.This is the card McCain is going to play for the next 5 months.He’s weak on the economy,trade etc so it’s going to be national security for the next five months.His message “be afraid be very afraid”.Most people I know are more afraid about paying their bills and dealing with $4.00 a gallon gas than Iran.
Foolishly I believed the experts and Bush administration about Sadam H’s weapons of mass destruction because I believed he may try to use them.This war has cost us a enormous amount of money and young lives plus horribly wounded and for what?The Surge I suppose worked to a degree but it will fail.The Iraq gvmnt is corupt and can not function without the support of the U.S. just like the South Vietnamese Gvmnt long ago.When the U.S. leaves the Maliki gvmnt will fold like a paper sack.I think it’s the Maliki gvmt it’s hard to keep up without a score card.
One of the things I noticed Obama hitting McCain on that he was right about was Iran is now stronger than it was because of the Iraq war.I still don’t see us getting out if Obama is elected but who knows.What a mess!
Obama makes the right move politically yesterday in defending his wife against the Tennessee republican attack ad.It’s the smart move.However Michelle Obama is not off limits in the campaign as far as attack and neither is Cindy McCain.The wives are surrogates out on the stump so they are fair game.Off limits are children and family members not involved campaigning openly for the candidates.
As far as ads go we haven’t seen anything yet.Wait until the 527’s get going.These attack machines are great for the candidates they can condem the ads while benefiting from them.
Count me in that category. I can only cut back my driving so far, but at some point I do need to go to work, buy groceries, etc.
Democracy will never happen in the Middle East. It is not a part of their society. The muslim faith is not based on democracy. We can make artificial democracy happen as long as we are in Iraq. But when we leave the void they are experiencing will be filled by another Saddam; or worse.
Change “terrorism” to “global warming”, or really any other Democrat pushed issue, and McCain could say the same thing about Obama.
Global warming fear mongering is all based on worst case scenarios, not unlike Iran getting the bomb and nuking Israel.
If it wasn’t for blatant fear mongering, we’d have privatized Socialist Insecurity, for example.
Democracy won’t happen in the Middle East because we are pushing it. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that it will never happen or that it can’t happen because of their culture or their religion.
I’m not sure there was anything inevitable about the cultures of western Europe or Christianity that lead to democracy in those countries.
I think democracy happened in England because of the ebb and flow of power between the King and powerful members of the nobility. Both sides used shifting justifications for retaining their own power. Both sides used the courts to shore up their power. The justifications and courts sort of took a life of their own and emerged as “natural rights” that some of the rabble came to take seriously and the courts came to enforce seriously. It was an organic, evolutionary process. I don’t think it’s terribly easy to impose from above.
(I’m sure my summary of the evolution of democracy is horribly flawed in a number of ways, so don’t rely on this if you are, for example, submitting a paper to a history professor.)
And, god, I just feel awful about all of those young men and women dying because of all the global warming “fear mongering.”
And, god, I just feel awful about all of those young men and women dying because of all the global warming “fear mongering.â€
Can we step up the intelligence a notch?
Look, where did the biofuels mandate that is currently driving food prices through the roof and starving millions of third world people come from?
The biofuels mandate began as a clean air intiative. Ethanol has oxygen in it, and it burns cleaner (less CO and HCs) in carburated engines than straight up gasoline does.
Nevermind that cars aren’t carburated anymore, or that fuel injection systems know how much oxygen is in the fuel and adjusts accordingly (thus, no improvement in CO or HCs).
This is the road we are going down with global warming. The law of unintended consequences and opportunity costs are going to kick in with a vengence.
And for what? For a problem that is sold with worst case scenarios and fear mongering.
The biofuels situation happened because the corn lobby saw a chance for profits. It has nothing to do with whether or not global warming is happening, or whether it is happening on a scale consistent with what we consider a “worst case scenario.”
At lot of the effects we are seeing are exceeding the worst case scenarios envisioned just a few years ago. The retreat of sea ice in the Arctic, for example. Or the retreat of the Greenland ice sheet. These are progressing much quicker than envisioned. They’re now probably entering a positive feedback situation where they will likely continue to accelerate.
Likewise, the current food crisis is partly shortage due to the biofuel movement. But it is being exacerbated by speculation in commodity markets, followed by profiteering on down the line. If you had asked during the Enron-engineered California “energy crisis” what such a thing would look like with food rather than energy, here’s your answer.