The Left Only Pretended to Be for the War in Afghanistan
Escalation is a bad idea. The Democrats backed themselves into defending the idea of Afghanistan being The Good War because they felt they needed to prove their macho bonafides when they called for withdrawal from Iraq. Nobody asked too many questions sat [sic] the time, including me. But none of us should forget that it was a political strategy, not a serious foreign policy.
There have been many campaign promises “adjusted” since the election. There is no reason that the administration should feel any more bound to what they said about this than all the other committments [sic] it has blithely turned aside in the interest of “pragmatism.”
In an update published after NRO linked her post, well-respected leftist blogger “digby” defends the honor of Democrats by explaining:
They weren’t pacifists. They were just liars and political opportunists.
Ah.
Oh, well that’s a very different thing! Never mind!
What really astounds me is that digby probably will reread that and still won’t in any manner shape or form, recognize how utterly corrupt and immoral it is.
BJTexs (a2cb5a) — 9/23/2009 @ 7:24 amliars and political opportunists
Ding, Ding, Ding! We have a winner here Alex!
The Vision of the Annointed by Thomas Sowell. Read it, it is beyond great.
J. Raymond Wright (e8d0ca) — 9/23/2009 @ 7:32 amVictor Davis Hanson has the key insight today on the Obama administration.
If you are confused by the first nine months of the Obama administration, take solace that there is at least a pattern. The president, you see, thinks America is a university and that he is our campus president. Keep that in mind, and almost everything else makes sense.
Then think about the Duke U president and the hockey team. This is not about the major interests of the US or about world history or justice. It is about Obama’s view of the world. We are the bad guys in any situation and he must act to atone for our previous policies.
But some people, including Barack Obama, whose college thesis written in those years has never been made public, seem stuck in a time warp in which the United States is the bad guy.
That, at least, seems to explain Obama’s latest foreign policy moves, starting with Honduras, where the president was ousted by the Supreme Court for violating a constitutional provision that forbids any moves to seek a second term. (Other Latin countries, notably Mexico, have similar constitutional prohibitions.) The White House immediately interpreted this as a military coup and decided that, this time, the United States would come out on the side of “the people.” In fact, we find ourselves siding with a friend of the Iranian mullahs, Hugo Chavez, who swept aside similar constitutional limits in Venezuela, and opposing the elected Congress, courts and civil society of Honduras.
Honduras is not the only or, sad to say, most important example of where this administration has come out on the side of our enemies and against our friends.
He is working on getting us out of Afghanistan, eastern Europe, Iraq, Africa and anywhere else we might be engaged. Health care reform and global warming are far more important than this endless policing of the world, especially since we are the villain in Obama’s opinion, almost everywhere.
The question is how to prepare the American people who, in Steve Chu’s words are just like your teenage kids, aren’t acting in a way that they should act. How to get around the regrettable tendency of the hoi polloi to misunderstand when the professor is trying to do the “right thing?”
Maybe he will just wait until the situation becomes obvious. General McChrystal is smarter than that and will not let him torpedo the mission so the next response is also typical.
Many of the former Professor Obama’s problems so far hinge on his administration’s inability to judge public opinion, its own self-righteous sense of self, its non-stop sermonizing, and its suspicion of sincere dissent.
But that won’t stop them. They know they are smarter than we are. I must add that, with this crew in charge, I think getting out of Afghanistan is our best option right now. Too many lives will be lost with a feckless policy, just like LBJ. He won’t let them win (if anybody can in AF) and he’s too afraid of public opinion to pull out. At least McGovern was honest enough to tell us what he wanted to do. Obama lies when he doesn’t have to. He likes it.
Mike K (addb13) — 9/23/2009 @ 7:52 am“They weren’t pacifists. They were just liars and political opportunists.”
I can respect a pacifist who is willing to act in a way consistent with his ideals when he is the one caught in the jam.
There is no respect for “liars and political opportunists” unless one is the same and has admiration for those who do it better.
So, she is admitting that Congressman Wilson was right after all? It is President Obama who owes the country an apology. This country.
Worse than those who do evil are those who approve of it and teach others to do so as well. President Obama is the one disrespecting and bringing disgrace to the office of the President of the United State. To point it out is to hold the office in esteem.
MD in Philly (d4f9fa) — 9/23/2009 @ 8:09 amEverybody who’s surprised, sign up for the public flogging. Starts at noon.
Richard Aubrey (a9ba34) — 9/23/2009 @ 8:09 amThe democrats rolled over as usual and gave you everything you wanted. You ran one war, disorganized and undermanned, by choice and plan, and then in a fit f ADD started another, this one unnecessary and run the same way. All while calling for tax cuts. And now the military is fighting more for pride than anything, as cooler heads have argued a need to rethink.
But now you accuse the democrats of thought crime, as if pessimism were treason. Blame anyone but yourselves for your mistakes. In politics fools rush in where wise but weak men acquiesce.
That was digby’s point.
You have no shame.
bored again (d80b5a) — 9/23/2009 @ 8:18 amVery nice catch!
The left knew it was a ruse when Obama declared that the ‘real’ war was in Afghanistan and not Iraq. Unfortunately, centrist voters took the Chosen One at his word and they now expect Him to be competent enough to lead the war effort in central Asia. ( for more on the vise Obama made for himself in Afghanistan, you can visit here )
[note: fished from spam filter. –Stashiu]
MAS1916 (9c3ecb) — 9/23/2009 @ 8:33 amSo the Democrats “weren’t pacifists. They were just liars and political opportunists.”
Most of us knew this, of course. It is too bad that so many Americans were taken in by their lies.
The Weed Of Crime Bears Bitter Fruit, and Nancy Pelosi’s “Culture of Corruption” has deep roots in the Democratic Party. Does anyone have any Roundup?
tyree (60c95a) — 9/23/2009 @ 8:48 amIf ba has a cogent point to make, I – for one – missed it among all of the nonsense.
AD - RtR/OS! (5b5739) — 9/23/2009 @ 8:51 amBored is lying, again, but as the Left has demonstrated for us so nicely above, that is a feature, not a bug. The article above is really breathtaking in that they lay their mendacity out there for all to see, but rather than be embarassed by it, they are proud of it. /spit
JD (979402) — 9/23/2009 @ 8:53 amComment by tyree — 9/23/2009 @ 8:48 am
Wouldn’t a length of hemp rope be more environmentally friendly than “Roundup”?
Of course, there always is Roundup-v7.62!
AD - RtR/OS! (5b5739) — 9/23/2009 @ 8:55 amDigby’s point seems to be that Democrats are liars and political opportunists.
MD in Philly (d4f9fa) — 9/23/2009 @ 8:55 amMD – Yet we are supposed to just trust them.
JD (979402) — 9/23/2009 @ 8:58 amIt is hardly new to see the Left openly swimming in deceit. Nor is it new to see MSM give the Left a pass. Remember Clinton, et al?
John Hitchcock (3fd153) — 9/23/2009 @ 9:04 amNo need to waste much energy on “Digby” and her/his lot. They represent no threat to anything or anyone – they have no courage in their convictions and lack balls. No, not in the macho – “I’ll beat you up..” sense, but in the “I am lazy and weak and no matter what I spout I will not really do anything or stand up for what I believe in…”
Think of Desmond Doss – pacifist who was a medical corpsman in WWII and was awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor for heroism in saving the lives of multiple men while under fire. But the left would likely scorn such a person, he apparently had “religious” convictions which prompted him to act on his beliefs and refuse to use arms or drill, but he did not refuse to serve as he realized someone else would take his place – so he was a medic.
Peace is so much easier when others – be they soldiers or victims of repression/violence – pay the price of your convictions, eh “digby”?
Californio (08da63) — 9/23/2009 @ 9:04 am[They would run to Canada if faced with choices Doss faced.]
You have no shame.
Said by one who has no brains, no integrity, and no honor. Go read your Dear Leader’s introductory bootlicking/kowtowing/surrendering remarks to the UN’s thugs and dictators and wallow in his feckless martyrdom. He will be soon be consigned to the ash heap of history, along with the other Marxists and quislings of Democracy
Dmac (a93b13) — 9/23/2009 @ 9:08 amIt took Carter years to do this much damage.
Kevin Murphy (3c3db0) — 9/23/2009 @ 9:10 amNo, the aptly named fellow—who should call himself “bored undergraduate avoiding studying” writes:
Wow. Let’s start off by insulting the armed forces. Why not call them “babykillers” or something?
Then we move on (so to speak) to Troll Thesaurus 101: “Cooler heads” clearly means “people with whom I agree.” “Rethink” means “agree with me.”
My favorite line was the “as if pessimism were treason” comment. I would bet cash money that BAUAS feels quite differently about the Tea Party protestors. Their pessimism is impermissible to him, I’m pretty sure.
Just like the dissent = patriotism meme changed once You Know Who was elected. You see, they were Hoping you would not notice the Change in partisan strategy.
Just another partisan alphabetist. And he knows it. You can tell because he criticizes himself thusly:
Pretty funny, actually, given his knee-jerk talking points reactions here…that he rushes to make.
Eric Blair (0b61b2) — 9/23/2009 @ 9:10 amSeriously, I can’t read anymore of his speech – it’s even worse than his earlier on – bended – knee pleadings. This country doesn’t have anything to apologize to the UN about, you Aloha – island douchebag.
Dmac (a93b13) — 9/23/2009 @ 9:11 amOnce again revealing the mindset that the “ends justify the means.” Which, when applied to conservatives, is considered mendacious and a “vast, right-wing connspiracy.” But when applied to the left is “Progressivism,” aka “Hope and Change.”
Please make a note of it. There’ll be a test later.
Steve B (5eacf6) — 9/23/2009 @ 9:14 amThis mendoucheity needs to be spread far and wide. These are the people that want to control your healthcare, implement cap & destroy, take more of your hard earned money, and walk away in Iraq and Afghanistan. As they have admitted, you do not need to take them at their word, as their stated intent rarely has anything to do with reality. Winning and political power is their goal, ends be damned.
JD (959071) — 9/23/2009 @ 9:47 ambored again isn’t even entertaining. Go back to your meeting of Swarthmore Progressive Alliance or whatever dork-group you joined as a freshman last year to try to score with hippie chicks on campus.
SPC Jack Klompus (c1922b) — 9/23/2009 @ 9:58 am“Oh, well that’s a very different thing! Never mind!
What really astounds me is that digby probably will reread that and still won’t in any manner shape or form, recognize how utterly corrupt and immoral it is.”
– BJTexs
Are you kidding, dude? digby (whoever that it is) is not trying to defend the Democrats – the “liars and political opportunists” remark is a straight-up condemnation, not any sort of attempt at justification. In fact, the whole post is about the Democrats being scum – that, and the fact that a bunch of NRO commenters are too dumb to realize when someone’s agreeing with them.
Leviticus (30ac20) — 9/23/2009 @ 10:10 am“There have been many campaign promises “adjusted” since the election. There is no reason that the administration should feel any more bound to what they said about this than all the other committments [sic] it has blithely turned aside in the interest of “pragmatism.”
– digby, as quoted by Patterico
And this, Patterico? This is back-handed slap to the administration – this is digby saying (sarcastically), “well, shit – they’ve lied about everything else, why don’t they go ahead and lie about this, too? It’s not like they place a premium on honesty.” Maybe you know this already – that digby’s whole post is a screed against the Democrats – but if you do, you should probably make digby’s intent a little clearer in your post.
[note: fished from moderation. –Stashiu]
Leviticus (30ac20) — 9/23/2009 @ 10:15 amThat was no condemnation, Leviticus. Digby sounded practically proud of their actions.
Another Leftist stifling free speech by closing comments when someone disagrees with them 😉
JD (959071) — 9/23/2009 @ 10:17 amI guess Obama never met a thug or dictator he didn’t like. Canada and Germany will walk out of the UN if Iran denies the Holocaust, but Obama will probably invite the world’s dictators for another beer summit. Instead of making book on whether the US is hit with another attack, we should probably be making book on when the next attack will occur, since the Apologist in Chief hasn’t done a single thing to send a message to our enemies that we’re anything but weak.
Rochf (ae9c58) — 9/23/2009 @ 10:32 amThe more I think about this post, the more repulsed I become.
JD (959071) — 9/23/2009 @ 10:40 amDigby should be given credit for admitting, in a very public manner, the abject mendacity of the Left.
JD (959071) — 9/23/2009 @ 10:42 amWhich city will we lose that will cause the Left to realize where they are taking us?
AD - RtR/OS! (5b5739) — 9/23/2009 @ 10:46 am“They weren’t pacifists. They were just liars and political opportunists.”
Hell, I’ve been trying to tell people that ever since the Vietnam War days.
Dave Surls (8cad06) — 9/23/2009 @ 12:03 pmMyron does a good job of displaying this school of Leftist thought in another thread. Since the Left admits that they will say anything they want to advance their political ends at any given point in time, there is not one single solitary reason to trust them on issues like national security, or taking over healthcare.
JD (959071) — 9/23/2009 @ 12:08 pm“Another Leftist stifling free speech by closing comments when someone disagrees with them.”
– JD
Another Leftist sick to death of knee-jerk conservatives missing the point of a post.
Leviticus (35fbde) — 9/23/2009 @ 1:22 pmLeviticus – I should have put the /sarc tags on there more clearly. I just pointed that out since it is something that the trolls, not you, so routinely whine about.
JD (5d3c32) — 9/23/2009 @ 1:24 pmLeviticus,
I looked at the referenced site. While she has plenty of complaints about Dems as well as Repubs, I had the sense that the quoted statement was meant as represented. Maybe I missed something.
MD in Philly (d4f9fa) — 9/23/2009 @ 1:39 pmIraq was ‘fools rushing in’? Let’s see about that rush. From memory, an Iraq invasion went on the table in the summer of 2002. Congress voted to give GWB authority to invade in September of 2002. The UN Security Council passed a number of resolutions beginning, I think, in August. The Iraq invasion happened in March 2003 – after some 9 months of front burner debate across the media, UN and Congress.
But don’t fret. There is a ‘fools rush in’ scenario you might want to address. How about a health care overhaul that needed to be voted on before anyone had time to read the bill? Does that fit?
EBJ (2fd7f7) — 9/23/2009 @ 3:08 pmEBJ, it needed to be voted upon before they had even written the bill…details to follow…just like the stimulus.
AD - RtR/OS! (97af1e) — 9/23/2009 @ 3:25 pmI think Instapundit said it best: They aren’t anti-war. They’re on the other side.
epobirs (bec491) — 9/23/2009 @ 3:48 pmActually the answer is simple: the Left was for the war before they were against it. Just ask John Kerry.
Bored Lawyer (44ef84) — 9/23/2009 @ 3:49 pm“Iraq was ‘fools rushing in’? Let’s see about that rush. From memory, an Iraq invasion went on the table in the summer of 2002.”
You left out the 1990 invasion of Kuwait by Iraq, the 1991 campaign to drive them out, the broken ceasefire agreement, as well as the hundreds of air raids flown against Iraq by the Clinton administration.
Dave Surls (8cad06) — 9/23/2009 @ 3:52 pmThe Democrats lied us into war!!!!11!!11ty!!!
This post once again illustrates the classic principle – Democrats can’t say what they really want or nobody would vote for them.
See also Exhibit A – Barack Obama and his fading administration.
daleyrocks (718861) — 9/23/2009 @ 4:37 pmJD,
No worries. I took no offense. I was just pointing out digby’s reasoning for closing comments – namely, that a bunch of NRO trolls came in and shat all over the place because they couldn’t piece together the overall tone of the post. In digby’s own words, “here I put out the hand of friendship and agree that the Democrats are just as full of it as the Republicans when it comes to Afghanistan and they call me a traitor.” I was just trying to point out an alternative explanation as to why digby closed comments on that post.
MD in Philly,
Actually, you’re probably right – that is, digby probably does believe that the US should withdraw from Afghanistan. But what the post doesn’t indicate (and what it’s being accused of indicating, which was what prompted my first response) is that digby is either happy with the way the Democrats have conducted themselves or thinks it the proper sort of conduct (or thinks that it’s okay to be a liar or an opportunist). Either way, the overall tone of the piece indicates digby’s utter disgust with the Democratic Party, and while he/she may believe that the administration might as well lie its way out of Afghanistan now that they’ve lied about nearly everything else, it seems fairly clear to me that he/she would rather they’d kept all their promises and conducted themselves in an honorable manner, even we kept troops in Afghanistan as a result.
But my comments were originally intended only to point out that the post gives a tongue-lashing to the Democratic Party, and in no way attempts excuse their lying or their opportunism (which I’m not sure Patterico’s post makes clear enough, though I ascribe no ill intentions to it).
Leviticus (30ac20) — 9/23/2009 @ 6:23 pmLeviticus, I am thinking of enrolling you in the league of serious thinkers. I think your post above is serious and of merit.
What so many on the left do not realize (and I am not placing you on the left) is that the tea party folks are almost as angry with Republicans. The next year will show whether the Republicans can learn enough to atone for their mistakes when they were in the majority or whether we will have a third party.
What I do know is that we are running out of time to salvage the American experiment before it turns to s**t.
Mike K (2cf494) — 9/23/2009 @ 6:38 pmMike K – I aspire to be in the League of Serious Snarkers.
JD (cbe522) — 9/23/2009 @ 6:49 pmThanks for the thoughts, Leviticus.
I must say, when someone starts ranting about everybody and everything I wonder if there even is a rational train of thought.
I agree that digby is not a good candidate as an example for the self-revelation of the left. He does show disdain for the Dems, but his commentary is bizarre, such as saying it is wrong to say “the Dems are always anti-war, the Dems are always ready to go along with war”.
I think the comments he made that lead off this thread about the Dems were serious, but were matter of fact, neither meant as praise nor rebuke. I think he is pretty amoral on how you get there, as long as “there” is where he wants to go. More could be said, but I think we both have better things to discuss. We agree more than disagree on this.
MD in Philly (d4f9fa) — 9/23/2009 @ 7:07 pmMike K,
I agree in re: the American Experiment, but I don’t think we’re going to have a third party in this country unless we make some significant structural reforms.
Leviticus (30ac20) — 9/23/2009 @ 8:10 pmAt what point can we stop giving these fifth columnists the opportunity to do the damage we all know they’re going to do, since they demonstrate time and again their goal is the subversion of the United States, before we draw the definite conclusion that they should be not let anywhere near the levers of power under any circumstances?
That’s why I was so adamant that Pat shouldn’t have gratuitously said Obama was a “good man.” He isn’t, but I suppose some people have to wait for the mushroom cloud.
Go to Politico and read an article about all the “unintended” consequences of Cap & Trade that will result in orwellian levels of federal involvement in the sale of used homes, “The end of the fixer upper.” To the point it will reduce the value of used homes and make resale so expensive many people will be forced to walk away rather than try to sell.
Hello! Politico! Reducing greenhouse gasses will be an unintended consequence if it happens, which fortunately for the subversives is completely unlikely. The intrusion into the private sector and the economic take-over is the intended part. And when it fails to make us greener, they’ve already imposed the rationale for greater intrusions and economic interference.
Go to National Review and read “Lessons Unlearned” and read an article that wonders why Congressional Dems can’t seem to learn the lessons of the federally-engineered mortgage crisis. Because now they want to lower lending standards even further and regulate more and more financial institutions to make sure they comply with the new lower standards.
No, the slow learners are all on our side. The Alinskyites have learned very well how to destroy the country from within while all the while maintaining the facade that they only have our best interests at heart and that they share the same goals we do.
Can we stop giving these people some completely undeserved benefit-of-the-doubt and deal with reality?
Steve (501031) — 9/24/2009 @ 10:19 am