United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: From Wasilla to Washington, the Party of No has become the Party of Lies.
Source:
The Week
URL Source: http://www.theweek.com/bullpen/colu ... ill_Republican_tactics_succeed
Published: Feb 12, 2010
Author: Robert Shrum
Post Date: 2010-02-12 10:31:29 by war
Keywords: None
Views: 2147
Comments: 33
Sarah Palin sets the tone for a narrow, spiteful corner of American politics. That corner was occupied by the Tea Party convention last week in Nashville, where Palin served up a strong, carefully-brewed, neo-con-written speech featuring a blend of slurs steeped in personal animus toward Barack Obama. There were lies of a general nature, including the palm-reading Palin’s suggestion that the President is so out of his depth, so stupid—at least that’s what the cheering crowd heard—that he can’t function without a teleprompter. And the contradictory, but equally bogus, claim that Obama is a feeble egghead -- appealing to an old prejudice against intellectuals – who’s not up to the job. “We need a commander-in-chief,” Palin said, “not a law professor.” And there were specific lies. Obama is, in Palin’s telling, soft on terrorism. Why, he never uses the word “war” when referring to it. That’s a lie. Obama “apologizes” for “our men and women in uniform.” She never mentioned the President’s name, but her malevolent meaning was clear. That’s another lie. The stimulus didn’t create “one job.” There’s one more. With jobs lagging recovery, Palin reveled in the frustrations of the moment: “How is that hopey-changey stuff working out for you?” she sneered. With her “oh gosh” peddling of hate, Palin has hit a new low not only in her rhetoric but in The Washington Post/ABC poll. Seventy percent of Americans now view her as unqualified to be President. Still, I strongly favor her nomination; she’s a sure loser. (I know, some Democrats once said that about Ronald Reagan. But to compare her with him is to validate Marx’s observation that history repeats itself as farce.) Although Palin is the nominee Republican strategists fear most – they, too, are convinced she would sink the party -- I believe that in at least once sense she’s eminently qualified to be the Republican standard bearer. Bathed in the klieg lights of a media that cannot resist her performance art, she perfectly expresses the low standards to which the Republicans have now repaired: When “no” isn’t enough, just lie and smear the other side. Palin was snarky, snide and in a perverse way entertaining in her Tea Party keynote last Saturday. But she just kicked off the week. The Republican march of deception and personal destruction plowed right through the paralyzing snowdrifts in Washington. The GOP twisted the truth and portrayed the Administration as naïve or worse in dealing with terrorism because the underwear bomber had been read his Miranda rights. It then emerged that Republicans on the Intelligence Committees had been told on Christmas Day that he was in FBI custody; they were shocked, shocked to find out that this meant a Miranda warning—under rules established by the Bush Administration—rules which they certainly ought to know. National Security Council official John Brennan revealed the Christmas Day conversation just as it also emerged that the suspect was talking and providing valuable information; apparently American justice is working better than water boarding. Deprived of their concocted talking point, Republicans battered Brennan personally. In the Republican description of him, Brennan was transformed into “a White House staffer”—as if Brennan were some political operative from Chicago parachuted into one of the most sensitive positions in government. The crotchety and befuddled Republican Sen. Kit Bond of Missouri blustered that Brennan was a partisan who should resign. In reality, he is a career CIA official, a former deputy to the director of the CIA. The first head of the National Counterterrorism Center—under Bush, not Obama – Brennan has a lifetime record of serving country, not party. He’s almost certainly done more to protect national security than the politicians who tore at his reputation in the past week. Brennan made the obvious, essential point that playing politics with security could weaken America in combating terrorism. But Republicans didn’t seem to care. Palin lied, Bond bloviated and House GOP intelligence honcho Pete Hoekstra chimed in with the rest of the GOP chorus. Their attempted shredding of Brennan was a latter day version of Joe McCarthy’s sleazy attack on Secretary of State George Marshall as a disloyal American. (Note to Palin: Marshall was the General who commanded all U.S. forces in World War II, which was . . . oh, never mind.) One of the most egregious lies was peddled by Newt Gingrich. An intermittently serious figure and occasional buffoon, Gingrich this time plunged off the cliff when it was pointed out to him that the Bush Administration had Mirandized shoe-bomber Richard Reid. Gingrich, without missing a beat, glibly shot back that Reid was an American citizen. He wasn’t and isn’t, although he is an American prisoner for life in a supermax fortress in Colorado. Gingrich’s response was also beside the point; the Constitution applies even to foreign nationals arrested in the U.S.—which is why the Bush Administration, not exactly solicitous of the Bill of Rights, proceeded as it did. The lie machine churns on—and not just in the area of national security, where Republicans calculate that they have a precast advantage. In reaction to the President’s call for a bipartisan discussion on health care, Republican Congressional leaders Mitch McConnell and John Boehner said they were all for reform -- just junk the bill that’s already written and start over again. It’s the insurance industry’s dream—and a transparent deception. What the Republicans offer is a series of minor measures, including their favorite hobbyhorse, a crackdown on malpractice lawsuits. In sum, they might be willing to cover an additional three or four million people while costs and premiums continue to soar out of control. In the face of persistent Republican obstruction, now surrounded by a bodyguard of lies, impatient progressives complain that the President is naively clinging to bipartisanship. In the process, however, he’s also making it increasingly plain that the other side refuses to put country ahead of party. And in the end, the test is not how Obama tries, but whether he succeeds in passing health reform. Then, as the economy improves and Americans see real job creation, the next lie will surface -- that this President had nothing to do with the turnaround; it was bound to happen anyway. But in the long term, the party that lied us into the Iraq War won’t be able to lie its way to victory. Democrats are in a race against the economic clock in 2010, but it’s a near-certainty that the march of prosperity will outpace the march of deception by 2012. David Frum is right that at some point, the GOP will have to rethink itself and imagine something bigger than the nihilistic tactics of the moment. Obama’s right to be calm and hold his course. It’s how he got to the White House—and it’s how he will find a path, for himself and America, through this season of discontent. Palin, too, may yet be proved right – at least on one count. On election night 2008, she had intended to salute the new President’s “greatness.” It was a graceful note. But it was never delivered.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: war (#0)
Up until the SOTU he didn't use the term 'war'. Its amusing how the Leftwingnuts like yourself have to take things out of context in a vain attempt to make a point.
my anti groupie can't get through life without me.
Lie. December 1, 2009 Good evening. To the United States Corps of Cadets, to the men and women of our armed services, and to my fellow Americans: I want to speak to you tonight about our effort in Afghanistan – the nature of our commitment there, the scope of our interests, and the strategy that my Administration will pursue to bring this war to a successful conclusion. It is an honor for me to do so here – at West Point – where so many men and women have prepared to stand up for our security, and to represent what is finest about our country.
I’ll see what I can do about posting a more current pic, if you really want one. Badeye posted on 2003-03-15 09:26:22 ET Reply Trace You're kidding, right? "Remarks of Senator Obama: The War We Need to Win" the title of a speech Obama delivered in 2007. And so, a little more than a year after that bright September day, I was in the streets of Chicago again, this time speaking at a rally in opposition to war in Iraq. I did not oppose all wars, I said. I was a strong supporter of the war in Afghanistan. But I said I could not support a dumb war, a rash war in Iraq. I worried about a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences in the heart of the Muslim world. I pleaded that we "finish the fight with bin Ladin and al Qaeda. http://www.barackobama.com/2007/...he_war_we_need_to_win.php
Badeye never met a lie he couldn't tell...
I’ll see what I can do about posting a more current pic, if you really want one. Badeye posted on 2003-03-15 09:26:22 ET Reply Trace Perhaps he isn't lying - maybe he has a medical condition like dementia. We should give him the benefit of a doubt before calling him a liar.
No. He's lying. I go back 10 years with this asshole. Trust me. Notice that he willl never address me directly? He knows what is waiting if he does.
I’ll see what I can do about posting a more current pic, if you really want one. Badeye posted on 2003-03-15 09:26:22 ET Reply Trace Aha, that might explain a lot...(grin)
'War on Terror'. Thats the 'context'. And until the SOTU address, Owe-Bama and his administration refused to use the term. Read slower is my advice.
my anti groupie can't get through life without me.
Laughable assertion from my anti groupie, who's the internets best know fraud. Still pretending Long Island is NYC fraud? (laughing)
my anti groupie can't get through life without me.
See your #1 reply....(chuckle)
The only one pretending anything about Long Island is you. Some day, you're going to HAVE get over how your ass got kicked and move on.
I’ll see what I can do about posting a more current pic, if you really want one. Badeye posted on 2003-03-15 09:26:22 ET Reply Trace Even his context is a lie. Not long after he declared his candidacy he delivered a major address about the goals of the war being to defeat terrorism and terrorists...
I’ll see what I can do about posting a more current pic, if you really want one. Badeye posted on 2003-03-15 09:26:22 ET Reply Trace When I am President, we will wage the war that has to be won, with a comprehensive strategy with five elements: getting out of Iraq and on to the right battlefield in Afghanistan and Pakistan; developing the capabilities and partnerships we need to take out the terrorists and the world's most deadly weapons; engaging the world to dry up support for terror and extremism; restoring our values; and securing a more resilient homeland. We know we are not who they say we are. America is at war with terrorists who killed on our soil. I’ll see what I can do about posting a more current pic, if you really want one. Badeye posted on 2003-03-15 09:26:22 ET Reply Trace Gee, grammar cop ethel, can't dispute the fact he didn't use the term 'war' related to terror until the SOTU...no surprise.
my anti groupie can't get through life without me.
What is so special about those particular three words recited in that order?
Besides being what I was talking about? (laughing) You gotta be kidding.....(really laughing now)
my anti groupie can't get through life without me.
Nothing. That's the point.
I’ll see what I can do about posting a more current pic, if you really want one. Badeye posted on 2003-03-15 09:26:22 ET Reply Trace Okay, just keep on digging that hole deeper and deeper...(grin)
If you were honest you would admit that you neglected to tell us what you were talking about by leaving out the context. But then there would be no discussion because there is nothing magical about those three words.
Now you're getting it...(laughing)
I’ll see what I can do about posting a more current pic, if you really want one. Badeye posted on 2003-03-15 09:26:22 ET Reply Trace Where did you correct his grammar?
I’ll see what I can do about posting a more current pic, if you really want one. Badeye posted on 2003-03-15 09:26:22 ET Reply Trace Neither did you when you asserted that Obama didn't use the word "war" until the SOTU address.
He may really suffer from dementia.
More likely ever increasing Crown Royal moments.
I’ll see what I can do about posting a more current pic, if you really want one. Badeye posted on 2003-03-15 09:26:22 ET Reply Trace If I were really honest, I'd note you don't have the ability to follow a conversation in a political forum on the internet, as the past couple of days have indicated.
my anti groupie can't get through life without me.
I'm not the one pretending on the internet, thats my anti groupie, ethel.
my anti groupie can't get through life without me.
'bout time you admitted that you aren't (laughing)
I’ll see what I can do about posting a more current pic, if you really want one. Badeye posted on 2003-03-15 09:26:22 ET Reply Trace I haven't got all day to call people names.
Half dozen posts in the past 48 hours shows otherwise. And the point remains...(laughing)
my anti groupie can't get through life without me.
Six posts in two days is hardly hanging around all day.
Another example of your less than stellar reading comprehension skills. I didn't claim you were 'hanging around all day'....(laughing) First rule of holes. Learn it.
my anti groupie can't get through life without me.
Was that corps or corpse, warthog? Sneakypete, have you ever been married? Said things you later regretted?
Don't mind him as no one else does and the fact that his words have flexible and optional meanings to him is a major reason why...the fact that he's a lying asstroll with a hint of misogyny pretty much sums up the rest.
I’ll see what I can do about posting a more current pic, if you really want one. Badeye posted on 2003-03-15 09:26:22 ET Reply Trace And there were specific lies. Obama is, in Palin’s telling, soft on terrorism. Why, he never uses the word “war” when referring to it.
#2. To: Badeye (#1)
(Edited)
Up until the SOTU he didn't use the term 'war'.
#3. To: Badeye (#1)
Up until the SOTU he didn't use the term 'war'.
#4. To: lucysmom (#3)
#5. To: war (#4)
Badeye never met a lie he couldn't tell...
#6. To: lucysmom (#5)
(Edited)
#7. To: lucysmom (#5)
- maybe he has a medical condition like dementia.
#8. To: lucysmom (#3)
#9. To: lucysmom (#5)
#10. To: Badeye (#8)
'War on Terror'. Thats (sic) the 'context'.
#11. To: Badeye (#9)
Still pretending Long Island is NYC fraud?
#12. To: Fred Mertz (#10)
See your #1 reply....(chuckle)
#13. To: Fred Mertz (#10)
#14. To: Fred Mertz (#10)
#15. To: Badeye (#8)
'War on Terror'. Thats the 'context'.
#16. To: lucysmom (#15)
#17. To: lucysmom (#15)
#18. To: Badeye (#14)
#19. To: Badeye (#16)
Besides being what I was talking about?
#20. To: lucysmom (#19)
If you were honest
#21. To: Fred Mertz (#18)
#22. To: Badeye (#14)
Gee, grammar cop ethel, can't dispute the fact he didn't use the term 'war' related to terror until the SOTU...no surprise.
#23. To: war (#21)
#24. To: Fred Mertz (#23)
(Edited)
#25. To: lucysmom (#19)
#26. To: Fred Mertz (#23)
#27. To: Badeye (#25)
If I were really honest
#28. To: Badeye (#25)
I'd note you don't have the ability to follow a conversation in a political forum on the internet...
#29. To: lucysmom (#28)
#30. To: Badeye (#29)
#31. To: lucysmom (#30)
#32. To: war (#2)
To the United States Corps of Cadets,
#33. To: lucysmom (#30)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]