Obama’s Vietnam
[Guest post by DRJ]
James Taranto quotes CNN political analyst Gloria Borger’s take-away from a White House briefing:
GLORIA BORGER: “I was talking with a senior White House adviser today, Wolf, who put it to me this way. He said, “This is the last helicopter out of Saigon,” meaning they have made a political decision that they’re going to use their Democrats to get this through, because what they need, this aide says, is they need an accomplishment. And they believe that once this passes, people will begin to see the benefits of it, and it will not ricochet against them, but will work for them.”
Taranto sees two meanings:
“Mark Mardell, North American editor of the BBC, was watching and he blogged in response: “Fleeing a lost war is not the most optimistic metaphor for an adviser to adopt. And it still may go down in flames.”
But could Mardell have misunderstood the analogy? Maybe the point of comparison is that the fall of Saigon was a communist takeover.”
Sadly, they both could be right.
— DRJ
“…they have made a political decision that they’re going to use their Democrats to get this through, because what they need, this aide says, is they need an accomplishment.”
In these few words is exposed the lie, and the Constitutional abombination, that the Democratic Party and its current leader has become.
To paraphrase a recent surprise Republican victor: These congressmen are not “their” Democrats… they are the Democrats of the idiot voters who elected them!
sherlock (187c4a) — 3/4/2010 @ 8:27 pmI’m having trouble seeing how that fits with “the last helicopter out of Saigon”. Did we somehow turn around and win the war after that?
I guess he means the Dems who vote for it are the ones escaping on the helicopter to live another day. But then how does that fit with the assumption they’re not thinking about November but are prepared to lose their majorities, according to Pelosi?
Does this mean they’re forgetting about the economy altogether or what?
Gerald A (a66d02) — 3/4/2010 @ 8:28 pmI think the “bunker” metaphor is closer to it.
Kevin Murphy (3c3db0) — 3/4/2010 @ 8:28 pmI should more accurately have said “…they are the Democrats of the idiots, the deceased, and the deceased idiots who elected them!”
sherlock (187c4a) — 3/4/2010 @ 8:30 pmAlso I thought they were crediting Obama for the fairly stable situation in Iraq.
Gerald A (a66d02) — 3/4/2010 @ 8:30 pmOr, perhaps “Evacuate? In our moment of triumph? I think you overestimate their chances.”
Kevin Murphy (3c3db0) — 3/4/2010 @ 8:34 pmThe Democrats in the White House were very young when Saigon fell so their attitudes have been shaped by modern-day history books. In general, and especially at Ivy League institutions, the fall of Saigon has been portrayed as “the end of the Vietnam War and the start of a transition period leading to the formal reunification of Vietnam under communist rule.”
This is a positive event to liberals, i.e., the war of American aggression was ended and the country of Vietnam was reunified. So getting on the last chopper out of Vietnam is an example of Americans finally doing the right thing. To liberals, finally getting on the health care chopper would be a good thing, too.
DRJ (daa62a) — 3/4/2010 @ 8:37 pmDRJ – The SEIU can be the Khmer Rouge.
daleyrocks (5710d7) — 3/4/2010 @ 8:48 pmYes, DRJ, these people were the supporters of Ho Chi Minh. That last helicopter is their symbol of winning.
By the way, I am plowing through Mokyr’s book but it is heavy going. Much heavier than his other books which are excellent. This one seems to make the same point too many times. I’ll get through it.
Mike K (2cf494) — 3/4/2010 @ 8:53 pmThe real analogy is to how the USA deserted an ally. Which is what Obama intends on doing to the Democrats in Congress.
iconoclast (e235f2) — 3/4/2010 @ 8:57 pmi think the “evacuation” theme is most appropriate, since the health care bill is a giant load of scheisse, similar to what you would get if you were successful in treating an elephant herd for constipation….and given the large protuberances from Ear Leader’s otherwise empty skull, the simile is right on target.
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 3/4/2010 @ 9:03 pmI love the helicopter analogy. I can see those rats throwing off and betraying their friends, who will be “killed” and that had things been managed better, and with real commitment to an honorable goal, the need for escape wouldn’t even exist.
The GOP disgraced itself, as well, this week. They are the UN during the fall of Saigon standing idly bye while tragedy unfolds before their very eyes. Bunning grabbed the flag and tried to rally his party, but they would not see and they would not hear, and they would not speak. Pathetic.
Ed from SFV (f6a87d) — 3/4/2010 @ 9:33 pmCry me a river, I don’t think DRJ said anything that you refuted. I don’t understand your accusation that she is lying.
Clarify. Did she say reconcilation has never occurred? Of course, there’s a huge different between 51 senators and 60… it’s kinda the point of the senate, and it’s something the democrats pointed out recently when things went the other way.
But also, it’s highly annoying how democrats think something is OK if it’s been done by the GOP. Every time some issue makes the democrats look bad or doesn’t go the left’s way, someone screeches about how republicans were OK with something like it. In this case (in many cases), it’s not even a fair comparison, but why would it matter? The Senate is not a simple majority institution. For good reason. If something this massive can’t get 60% of the Senate on board, it doesn’t need to happen.
Not to mention, the people do not want this bill, and that’s why you want this issue closed ASAP.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 3/4/2010 @ 9:37 pmyou can delete my response if you were deleting trolls. Cool with me either way.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 3/4/2010 @ 9:38 pmCry:
Thanks for the final score. Can you provide the statistics, just for clarity’s sake?
Just to be clear, can you display the minor league record of the team before they stepped up to the big plate?
Also, you had a little problem with the quote punctuation (no worries, so do I), but my g key is broken.
The only reason I say this is because, some people on the other side of Hatch’s aisle may have had — just maybe — a problem with reconciliation at an earlier date.
Despite the final score.
Growing up is so f-ing hard to do.
Ag80 (f67beb) — 3/4/2010 @ 9:42 pmNo need to delete your comment Dustin, everyone will understand. “Cry me a river” was someone who was previously banned using an anonymizer. I’ve told him before that anonymizers are not perfect. They get through on occasion but usually only briefly. I hope he has a nice weekend.
Stashiu3 (44da70) — 3/4/2010 @ 9:45 pmOh well, I should have known better.
Ag80 (f67beb) — 3/4/2010 @ 9:48 pmSure, after you spike the water supply with Soma, maybe. The American people will see no benefit at all for six years, only higher taxes, which I predict will be wasted on even sillier projects in the meantime. Or will Al Gore break out his lock box?
They, we, will be livid.
Come on, this is intentional bankruptcy.
Patricia (e1047e) — 3/4/2010 @ 10:15 pmJust to put a fine point on the “last chopper from Saigon” meme:
AD - RtR/OS! (f85527) — 3/4/2010 @ 11:45 pmAmerica didn’t abandon the people of the Republic of VietNam, CONGRESS did!
It wasn’t done in my name.
I think the intention of the analogy was that this is the last opportunity to get away from something that has turned into a disaster due to mishandling. I think it means they see passage of the bill as the last opportunity to escape what would otherwise be a permanent imprint of defeat.
Not doing anything would be the equivalent of if the NVA had overrun the Embassy before any evacuation helicopters arrived, killing everyone they found still inside.
shipwreckedcrew (3dde12) — 3/5/2010 @ 1:13 amROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
HeavenSent (c3c032) — 3/5/2010 @ 4:39 amOT: To those who have never sen John Harwood of CNBC/The WSJ — he is a DC Reporter who over the last few years has engaged in virulent Bush bashing and Pro-Obama promotion on TV and in Print.
He has been dishonest to the point I have pointed out how he was a liberal pretending to wear the clothes of moderation.
Well, Alluh Akbar, John Harwood has been busted for having an affair with Democratic Senator Maria Cantwell (yes the one who stole a Senatorial election) and has been weeping like a f*g all over DC to avoid getting this scandal published. Well, his wife (who should be crying) is divorcing him. Kids involved for this sanctimonious LIAR.
John, hope it turns out even worse!
Schadenfreude forever.
HeavenSent (c3c032) — 3/5/2010 @ 4:45 amDo they mean the “benefits”, a term which I use very loosely, that do not appear until 3 years from now even if they pass it today?
How does this work? Either the Democrats are really smart and Im really stupid or or the Democrats are really stupid and Im just totally confused but I cant see how this can turn out well for them…. I just don’t understand the strategy. Do they really believe that Americans want this?
Dopey (a812c5) — 3/5/2010 @ 6:00 amWars are not won by evacuations
Winston Churchill
They had their chance and they blew it. Now all they can do is stalk.
Amphipolis (b120ce) — 3/5/2010 @ 7:42 amRe: #3:
Someone needs to pony up with one of those Hitler-rant “Downfall” clips regarding the attempt to push thru healthcare for the n-th time….
😉
rtrski (b47753) — 3/5/2010 @ 7:59 amIf they did that, the DMCA takedown notice would arrive in a nanosecond.
Kevin Murphy (3c3db0) — 3/5/2010 @ 8:37 am#23, Dopey.
In order to fudge the budget projections, the taxes begin immediately upon the bill passing into law, but the payouts are delayed by years (I’ve read 4). And the project is limited to the first ten years from the bill becoming law. So the budget projection has ten years of taxes, but less that that of expenditures.
This just means that it is certain that 2012 would have a Congress willing and prepared to repeal it over a veto, not that Obama would be re-elected anyway.
LarryD (feb78b) — 3/5/2010 @ 10:35 am#23, Dopey.
In order to fudge the budget projections, the taxes begin immediately upon the bill passing into law, but the payouts are delayed by years (I’ve read 4). And the projection is limited to the first ten years from the bill becoming law. So the budget projection has ten years of taxes, but less than that of expenditures.
This just means that it is certain that 2012 would have a Congress willing and prepared to repeal it over a veto, not that Obama would be re-elected anyway.
LarryD (feb78b) — 3/5/2010 @ 11:32 amLarryD, the only way 2012 would repeal is if 2012 put at least 60 Republicans (and no DIABLOs) in the Senate. RINOs would be iffy. And, in the modern lamestream media age, Republicans have never had that amount of majority.
That and a repeal of government bennies would require human sacrifices in the form of Republicans being voted out of office. This is why no government-paid freebie (on the backs of people who actually earn a living) has ever been repealed.
I am not at all interested in what may happen after this US-destroying, people-debilitating government take-over is voted in. Destroy this takeover before it takes place. And then, throw out the people who voted for this takeover.
John Hitchcock (8f46db) — 3/5/2010 @ 12:32 pmthere is a way to repeal government bennies, if it was repealed over for future generations.
Adding a clause disqualifying people born after January 1, 2011 from receiving Social Security benefits would eventually result in its repeal.
It is all about gradualism. After all, how many voters would care if Social Security benefits were repealed for people born after January 1, 2012?. None of them were born after that date.
Michael Ejercito (526413) — 3/5/2010 @ 12:51 pmWell, a Republican Congress could (now grab hold of something substantial so as to avoid an uncontrollable collapse onto the floor in fits of laughter) always just not fund it.
Well, that’s the theory – we all know what the actuality would be.
AD - RtR/OS! (abf357) — 3/5/2010 @ 12:54 pm